TREASURY

Euro

Tom Brake: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received from the tourism industry on the impact of the level of the pound against the euro since 1997.

Ruth Kelly: The Chancellor and other Treasury Ministers receive regular representations from across the business community on many issues and we value their insights. The Government fully appreciate that the weakness of the euro, together with a sharp slowdown in the world economy last year, has made conditions difficult for tourism and other exporting industries.
	The Government's commitment to helping the tourism industry has been underlined by Monday's announcement of the unique package of match funding with the industry for promotion of the UK overseas. This £20 million package means than an extra £38 million has now been granted from the reserve, in support of tourism promotion, since the start of foot and mouth. This is at a time of great economic pressure.

Euro

Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the performance of the euro since 1 January.

Ruth Kelly: It is not appropriate for the Government to comment on day-to-day developments in the foreign exchange market. The Government are pleased that the euro area is experiencing a broadly smooth changeover.

Euro

Kelvin Hopkins: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent discussions he has had with his German counterpart on the European single currency.

Ruth Kelly: The Chancellor has frequent discussions on a wide range of issues with his European counterparts.

Working Families Tax Credit

Peter Pike: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many families in the north-west are receiving working family tax credit.

Dawn Primarolo: There are currently more than 181,000 families in the north-west benefiting from WFTC.

Voluntary and Community Sectors

Vera Baird: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he is taking to support the voluntary and community sectors.

Andrew Smith: We value greatly the contribution of the voluntary and community sectors and have provided extensive support through a variety of fiscal and other measures.

Competitiveness

Robert Syms: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on policy measures he intends to take by way of taxation to improve the competitiveness of the UK economy.

Tom Harris: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what fiscal measures he is taking in relation to the productivity gap between Britain and her main European competitors.

Dawn Primarolo: This Government have made significant progress in creating a modern corporate tax regime, providing long-term stability and the best possible environment for investment. The UK now has its lowest ever corporation tax rate, and the lowest rate of any major industrialised nation.
	The Pre-Budget Report announced new measures to further encourage growth and improve competitiveness, including: further reduction in the CGT rate for business assets; an R&D tax credit for large companies; and a doubling of the size limit for the Enterprise Management Incentives employee share option scheme.

Competitiveness

Michael Spicer: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the impact of productivity on the UK's competitiveness.

Andrew Smith: The Government recognise the importance of productivity for competitiveness and is raising the sustainable rate of productivity growth through both macroeconomic stability and measures to promote competition, enterprise, skills and investment.

Competitiveness

Gregory Barker: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the impact that changes in regulation have had on the competitiveness of UK industry since 1997.

Dawn Primarolo: The Government have not made an aggregated assessment of the impact of regulation since 1997. Establishing such an assessment would undoubtedly involve significant practical difficulties.
	The impact of changes to a single regulation is considered at the policy development stage. A Regulatory Impact Assessment is completed for regulatory proposals unless the regulation has no or negligible costs. A RIA sets out the impact, in terms of costs, benefits and risks of the proposed regulation which could affect businesses, charities or the voluntary sector. This process helps policy makers to think through the consequences of proposals, improving the quality of advice to Ministers and encouraging informed public debate.
	Where Ministers choose a regulatory option, they must be satisfied that the benefits justify the costs.

Debt Relief

Ann McKechin: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the impact of the heavily indebted poor countries' debt relief process in delivering a sustainable exit from debt for eligible countries.

Ruth Kelly: The UK continues to work hard to ensure that the heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) initiative delivers an exit from unsustainable debt for eligible countries. We also call on other countries to follow our leads on bilateral policies, such as 100 per cent. relief at decision point, and in holding payments in trust for those countries yet to receive debt relief. Already 25 countries have qualified for debt relief, and they will benefit from over $60 billion in debt reduction, which will bring their debts to below the developing countries average.
	Indeed, just last week Ghana reached decision point qualifying for $3.7 billion of debt relief from the international community, and the UK is playing its part writing off over £200 million of debt owed by Ghana.
	At their meetings in November last year, both the International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC) and the IMF and Development Committee of the World Bank and the IMF, recognised that lower global growth prospects and declining terms of trade are likely to adversely affect many low-income countries. The IMFC, chaired by the Chancellor, called on the IMF, in close collaboration with the World Bank, to respond flexibly and proactively to the needs of Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs), including through additional concessional financing and debt relief where appropriate.

Debt Relief

Jenny Tonge: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to discuss the reform of the HIPC initiative to ensure that debt sustainability is consistent with achieving the 2015 development goals at the Financing for Development Conference in Mexico in March.

Ruth Kelly: The UK Government continue to work hard to ensure that the heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) initiative is a success and that it delivers a robust exit from unsustainable debt for eligible countries. The UK has been pushing to ensure that both donor countries and the international financial institutions respond flexibly and proactively to the needs of HIPCs in the current economic climate, and help those HIPCs that have yet to benefit from debt relief (such as those in conflict). In addition, the UK has pressed for all countries participating in the Financing for Development Conference in Monterrey, Mexico in March, to agree that future reviews of debt sustainability should also bear in mind the impact of debt relief on progress towards the achievement of the development goals contained in the Millennium Declaration (as can be seen from the draft Monterrey Consensus outcomes document, available at http://www.un.org/esa/ffd/).

Debt Relief

Jenny Tonge: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to discuss greater and faster debt relief with (a) the International Monetary Fund, (b) the World Bank and (c) the regional development banks.

Ruth Kelly: The UK Government have consistently been at the forefront of the international debate on debt relief issues, and have repeatedly pushed for the process to be speeded up.
	Out of 42 HIPCs in total, the UK Government are pleased that 25 have already reached decision point. However, most of the remaining countries are in conflict or have governance problems. For this reason the UK Government argued strongly last year for the creation of an International Monetary Fund post-conflict assistance account, and the UK is the first country to make a contribution.
	This account will help these countries to make progress towards peace, good governance and a sound economic framework so that they can secure the full benefits of debt relief under the HIPC initiative.
	Moreover, in November last year, in his role as chair to the International Monetary and Financial Committee of the International Monetary Fund, the Chancellor urged the World Bank and IMF to update their debt sustainability analyses in light of the global economic slowdown and declines in terms of trade. We should be proactive and flexible in order to supply additional debt relief at completion point for HIPCs, to ensure that the initiative delivers a robust exit from unsustainable debt.
	The United Nations Financing for Development Conference in Monterrey, Mexico in March and the spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in April will provide an opportunity for the UK Government to discuss greater and faster debt relief with international financial institutions.

Debt Relief

Jenny Tonge: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to discuss his proposal to hold the debt repayments of those countries without agreed poverty reduction strategy papers in a trust until a PRSP is agreed with other donor countries at the Financing for Development Conference in Mexico in March.

Ruth Kelly: The UK Government continue to use international meetings to push other donor countries to follow the UK's lead on its Xhold in trust" policy, and hold all debt payments in trust for the day they can be returned to fund poverty reduction for all countries still to secure debt relief under the heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) initiative because of civil wars, external conflict or the absence of a poverty reduction programme. We also urge other countries to continue to help those heavily indebted poor countries (HIPCs) that have yet to benefit from debt relief by providing them both technical and financial assistance on concessional terms and this year, we have spent £130 million on technical advice and capacity building, to support the PRSP process.

Debt Relief

Jenny Tonge: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to discuss the reform of poverty reduction strategy papers to take account of the financial resources required to achieve the 2015 development goals at the Financing for Development Conference in Mexico in March.

Ruth Kelly: The UK Government have been at the forefront of pressing for the development of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers as a key element of the HIPC debt relief process. PRSPs already provide an excellent framework for countries to set out their own spending priorities and needs, in order to achieve country owned goals, including the Millennium Development Goals.
	However, so far only 10 full PRSPs have been prepared although more than another 30 are under preparation. At the Financing for Development Conference the UK Government will continue to press for the development of well designed and costed PRSPs in all eligible countries. The UK Government will also continue to be calling for a substantial increase in development assistance in order to provide the financing required to meet the Millennium Development Goals.

Polarisation (Financial Advice)

Vincent Cable: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what response he has made to the Financial Services Authority's proposals to end polarisation in financial advice.

Ruth Kelly: I am pleased that the FSA have been able to take forward work on the polarisation regime by publishing consultation paper 121, setting out the options for reform. And I am sure there will be a lively debate about the FSA's proposals.
	In principle, these proposals could represent a significant move in the direction of deregulation while maintaining and enhancing consumer protection. But they are of course subject to consultation and I would encourage all those with views to look at the consultation paper and supporting research reports, and let the FSA have their views by 19 April.

Low Pay

Jeff Ennis: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what measures he is taking to increase the take-home pay of those in low paid work.

Dawn Primarolo: Over the last Parliament this Government introduced the following measures to make work pay: national minimum wage; working families tax credit and childcare tax credit; the 10 pence and 22 pence rates of income tax; and reforms to national insurance contributions.
	As a result of these measures families with children in the poorest fifth of the population are on average £1,700 a year better off in real terms.
	From April 2003, the working tax credit will extend the principles of WFTC to low paid people without children.

Public Debt

Lynne Jones: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the additional public debt would be as a percentage of GDP if all capital expenditure agreed under private finance and private partnership initiatives were included.

Andrew Smith: In my answer to my hon Friend the Member for Eccles (Ian Stewart) on 7 February 2002, Official Report, columns 1144–46W, I set out the estimated level of capital spend by the private sector in projects taken forward under the private finance initiative.
	It is not possible to calculate accurately the increased level of public debt that would be created if these projects were funded instead by the public sector. That would depend on the way in which the project was taken forward. Since the abolition of universal testing, public authorities choose the method of procurement which is best suited to individual projects.

Families

Caroline Flint: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent representations he has received on the measures he announced in the pre-Budget report to support families.

Dawn Primarolo: The Government have received a number of representations regarding measures announced in the PBR to support families and have held discussions with a wide range of organisations both within and outside of Government. These are being considered ahead of Budget and Spending Review 2002.

Productivity

Ben Chapman: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what his forecasts are for the impact of productivity on UK economic growth over the next three years.

Ruth Kelly: Table A4 of the November 2001 pre-Budget Report (Cm 5318) shows the assumed contribution of trend labour productivity growth to trend output growth in the Government's latest economic forecast. In the neutral case, growth of trend labour productivity is assumed to contribute 1.9 percentage points to annual trend output growth during the pre-Budget report forecast period.

Investment

Nigel Beard: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what fiscal steps he is taking to encourage investment by British business:

Ruth Kelly: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given earlier today to the hon. Member for Poole (Mr. Syms) at column 1424W.

Public Services

Roger Casale: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on his plans for investment in public services in London.

Andrew Smith: Plans for expenditure on public services across the UK for the next three years will be set out in the summer, following the Spending Review.

Public Services

Jim Dobbin: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how he intends to fund improvements in local authority public services; and if he will make a statement.

Andrew Smith: The Government are making additional investment in public services. Local authorities are no exception. Government grant increased by 7.5 per cent. in the 2002–03 local government finance settlement, with provision for spending on education up 8.8 per cent. and social services up 6.2 per cent.

Renewable Energy

Gareth Thomas: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will allocate additional resources for renewable energy in the comprehensive spending review.

Andrew Smith: Spending plans and outcome targets for Departments will be set as part of the 2002 spending review. The aim of the review will be to determine how best Departments' programmes can contribute to the Government's priorities.
	The 2002 spending review will roll forward existing spending plans and set budgets and outcome targets for Departments up to 2005–06. The aim of the review will be to determine how best Departments' programmes can contribute to the Government's priorities.
	The review, which will conclude by the summer of 2002, will take a thorough look at all programmes to ensure that the new plans fully reflect the Government's priorities and the scope for greater efficiency and effectiveness in service delivery. Each Department has been asked to produce a sustainable development report, which will assist in the consideration of the social, economic and environmental implications of their plans.

Combined Heat and Power

Gillian Merron: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the impact of the climate change levy on the combined heat and power industry.

Paul Boateng: The climate change levy package has delivered significant benefits to the combined heat and power (CHP) industry.
	Fuel used by CHP, heat produced by CHP and electricity sold direct from CHP are all free of the levy. CHP plant can also benefit from 100 per cent. Capital Allowances. Nevertheless, as announced in the Pre-Budget Report, the Government will consider the environmental case for providing even more favourable treatment for CHP.

Employment Levels

Piara S Khabra: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on recent measures he has taken to improve levels of employment.

Ruth Kelly: Figures recently announced show that the employment level is at 28,232 million, and the claimant unemployment level stands at 951,000. Claimant unemployment in Ealing, Southall is down by 27 per cent. since 1997. The new deal has been a contributing factor to these levels of unemployment.
	In particular new deal for young people has been successful in its four years of operation; it has placed over 340,000 18–24-year-olds into work. The new deal for 25 plus and the enhanced programme (since April 2001) has also helped over 92,000 long-term unemployed people into work.
	To build on this performance, the Government have introduced further measures to increase the effectiveness of the new deal and other employment programmes, including: piloting greater flexibility in the Options section of NDYP from November 2001 to give personal advisers more freedom to tailor the provision of support to meet the needs of the individuals, local employers and local labour markets; establishing a pilot mentoring scheme from January 2002 to assess how mentoring can best be used to improve employment chances and job retention under the new deal; step-up a new programme of transitional employment pilots will target our hardest to help clients who have not been able to find a job through the new deal. People who take up these jobs will receive individual support so that they can eventually make the transition to unsupported jobs in the open labour market; the Government are allocating additional resources to strengthen the Job Transition Service over the next two years, this is to support those communities affected by large-scale redundancies; and the working families' tax credit (WFTC) helps to make work pay for low to middle income families with children. Nearly 1.3 million families with children are currently receiving the WFTC, around 400,000 more than received its predecessor, Family Credit. On average these families are receiving £35 a week more on WFTC than under Family Credit.

Office for National Statistics

Paul Goodman: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the operations of the Office for National Statistics.

Ruth Kelly: The Office for National Statistics operates in accordance with its three year business plan and reports performance in its annual report and accounts. Copies of these documents are available in the House of Commons Library and on the National Statistics website.

Tax Credits

Mark Hendrick: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on how the new integrated tax credits will affect families with children in Lancashire.

Dawn Primarolo: The new child tax credit, to be introduced in April 2003, will be a single, seamless system of support for families with children. It will build on the foundation of universal child benefit, bringing together all income related payments for children into a single strand of support paid to the main carer.
	The child tax credit will be complemented by the new working tax credit and rates and thresholds for these two new tax credits will be set in Budget 2002. As decisions on rates and thresholds have not yet been taken, it is not possible to assess the impact of the tax credits on particular families.

Labour Statistics

Roger Williams: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the estimate his Department has made of the proportion of the work force who are unemployed and economically inactive, broken down by region.

Ruth Kelly: The Government's aim is employment opportunity for all, moving towards our long-term ambition that, by the end of the decade, there will be a higher proportion of people in work than ever before.
	The number of jobs has increased by over 1.25 million since the 1997 election, with employment rising and unemployment falling in every region and country of the UK.
	The monthly National Statistics First Release XLabour Market Statistics" reports labour market data for the regions and countries of the UK. The regional labour market summary in Table 18(1) includes figures on unemployment and economic activity on the basis requested. This publication is available in the Library of the House of Commons.

Private Finance Initiative

Andrew Turner: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the aggregate debt is authorised through PFI projects by the Government sine 1997.

Andrew Smith: The annual Financial Statement and Budget Report sets out the estimated level of payments under PFI contracts for the next 25 years. In my answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Eccles (Ian Stewart) on 7 February 2002, Official Report, columns 1144–46W, I updated this table.
	These figures represent expected payments for services delivered under PFI contracts. Such payments are conditional on the delivery of services to the agreed standard and may be terminated or abated in the event of failure to do so.

World Poverty

Ernie Ross: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on progress in international efforts to relieve world poverty.

Ruth Kelly: In recent decades, global development progress has taken place at historically unprecedented rates. Over the last 40 years life expectancy at birth in developing countries has increased by a remarkable 20 years. Over the past 30 years, the illiteracy rate in the developing world has been cut by nearly half, from 47 per cent. to 25 per cent. of all adults. The number of people subsisting on less than $1 per day rose steadily for nearly two centuries, but over the past 20 years it has begun to fall. Thanks to better economic policies in many countries—most importantly in China and India—the number of poor people worldwide has fallen by up to 200 million, even as the world's population rose by 1.6 billion since 1980.
	But progress has not been even. Sub-Saharan Africa saw no increase in its per capita incomes between 1965 and 1999, even with improved performance in the late 1990s. Despite progress in education and health indicators, the AIDS epidemic has sharply reversed progress on life expectancy in this region. Many of the transition economics of Eastern Europe and Central Asia suffered deep declines in living standards and sharp rises in inequality during the 1990s.
	The UK fully supports the Millennium Development Goals agreed by the United Nations, including that by 2015: instead of 110 million children denied primary education, every child will have the chance of schooling; instead of seven million avoidable deaths each year from preventable diseases, child mortality will be reduced by two thirds; and instead of one billion living in absolute poverty, the proportion of people living in poverty will be halved by 2015.
	These are challenging targets. But with the right policies in developing countries and developed countries, supported by the right amount and effective use of resources, most of the goals are achievable. For globalisation to be managed well, we need effective and transparent global institutions which address the challenges in the poorest countries. Trade, investment and development assistance are essential building blocks for poverty reduction.
	The Government have increased the budget of the Department for International Development (DfID) to £3.6 billion—a 45 per cent. increase in real terms between 1997–98 and 2003–04. We will significantly raise the amount of our development aid, and also raise its share in national income, in our next spending round covering the years up to 2005–06. The Government are also promoting a significant increase in development aid from all donor countries and international institutions to build capacity and address the long-term causes of poverty in the poorest countries. The Government have proposed an International Development Trust Fund to pool contributions and build on the work of the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the regional development banks.

External Contracts

Pete Wishart: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  if he will list the 30 largest contracts awarded by his Department from (a) May 1997 to April 1998, (b) May 1998 to April 1999, (c) May 1999 to April 2000, (d) May 2000 to April 2001 and (e) May 2001 to the latest date, indicating in each case the values of the contracts and the companies with which the contracts were placed;
	(2)  which non-accounting and non-information technology external organisations which previously held contracts with his Department (a) won new contracts at the culmination of the existing contracts and (b) won new contracts after a period of inactivity with his Department in each of the past five years;
	(3)  which non-accounting and non-information technology external organisations have won new contracts with (a) his Department and (b) executive agencies in each of the past five years.

Ruth Kelly: This information could be collated only at disproportionate cost.

Office of National Savings

Christopher Chope: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the answer of 25 February 2002, Official Report, column 1037W, if he will place a copy of the strategic marketing review in the Library.

Ruth Kelly: It would not be appropriate to place the strategic marketing review in the Library as it contains material that is commercially sensitive.

Office of National Savings

Christopher Chope: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the answer of 25 February 2002, Official Report, column 1037W, what action the Office of National Savings has taken, pursuant to the conclusion of the strategic marketing review that it should develop the relationship with Post Office.

Ruth Kelly: We have set up a governance structure at a strategic and tactical level between National Savings and Investments and Post Office Limited, working jointly on projects to achieve positive outcomes and increased value for both organisations. This has led to a deeper understanding of each organisation's primary objectives and business environment, and consequently a much greater degree of commercial and operational alignment.

Payroll Systems

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many small businesses have accepted the offer of a detailed health check of their payroll systems.

Dawn Primarolo: The information is as follows:
	Year ended 31 March 2001*—1,075
	1 April 2001 to 31 January 2002—627
	* First year health check service offered.

Income Tax

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the trends in the number of income tax payers between (a) 1997–98 and (b) 2001–02.

Dawn Primarolo: I refer the hon. Member to XInland Revenue Statistics" table 2.1, a copy of which is available in the Library of the House. The latest version can be accessed on the Inland Revenue website http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/stats/income—tax/it—t01—1.htm.

UK Poverty

Mike Gapes: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on his plans to reduce poverty in the United Kingdom.

Dawn Primarolo: This Government are committed to abolishing child poverty within a generation and halving it by 2010. A strategy document entitled XTackling child poverty: giving every child the best possible start in life" was published in December 2001. This document will inform the Budget and Spending Review 2002.
	As a result of personal tax and benefit changes announced in the last Parliament, there are now 1.2 million fewer children in poverty than there would otherwise have been. A new tax credit for families with children—the child tax credit—will be introduced for children from April 2003 building on the foundation of universal child benefit. But child poverty is not only about incomes, it is also about inadequate service provision. The Government have made substantial new investments in this area. From 2000–01—2003–04, average real-terms annual growth in spending on education and training in England will be over 5.5 per cent. In addition, extra funds have been made available for SureStart, Neighbourhood Renewal and the Children's Fund.

Afghanistan

Tam Dalyell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much has been allocated from the contingency fund to finance the military action in Afghanistan.

Andrew Smith: The Contingencies Fund is not part of the Government's budgetary arrangements. It allows for cash advances to departments for expenditure on urgent services in anticipation of parliamentary approval.
	MOD are seeking an advance pending Spring Supplementary Estimates approval for £1.6 billion, to be repaid once the Estimate is approved. This relates to a range of additional resources for MOD, including Afghanistan.
	I refer my hon. Friend to the answers given by the Minister of State for the Armed Forces on 26 February 2002, Official Report, column 1133–34W, which set out the level of MOD spending on Afghanistan.

Arthur Andersen

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer for what reason he selected Arthur Andersen to take the lead role in his value for money report on PFI; and how many PFI contracts have been given to (a) Arthur Andersen and (b) Accenture since that report was completed.

Andrew Smith: Through a competition under established procurement procedures, a report on Value for Money Drivers in the Private Finance Initiative was commissioned in 1999 by the Treasury Taskforce. Three firms bid for the work including Arthur Andersen, which was selected because it offered best value for money.
	The report was delivered to the Taskforce and made available publicly in January 2000. Information on contracts for advisory services to departments on PFI projects is not recorded centrally.

Contracts

Don Foster: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many contracts were let by his Department and agencies for which he is responsible to (a) PWC Consulting or PricewaterhouseCoopers, (b) Ernst & Young, (c) Deloitte & Touche, (d) KPMG and (e) Andersen for consultancy services for the financial years (i) 1997–98, (ii) 1998–99, (iii) 1999–2000, (iv) 2000–01 and (v) 2001 to the latest date for which figures are available, indicating the remuneration in each case.

Ruth Kelly: The following information and tables provide the information required in the form in which the Chancellor's Departments and agencies have been able to compile it, without having to incur disproportionate costs.
	
		HM Treasury including DMO 
		
			 Spend £ 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 
		
		
			 Andersen nil nil nil £49,350 £15,275 
			 Deloitte & Touche nil £411 nil nil £91,473 
			 Ernst & Young £9,928 £156,144 £122,800 nil nil 
			 KPMG £52,876 £5,875 £268,775 £41,125 nil 
			 PricewaterhouseCoopers £46,903 £87,773 £356,513 £462,251 £19,892 
		
	
	
		Office of Government Commerce including OGC Buying Solutions
		
			 Spend £ 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 
		
		
			 Andersen Consulting nil nil nil nil nil 
			 Deloitte & Touche nil nil nil nil nil 
			 Ernst & Young nil nil nil nil nil 
			 KPMG £138,000 £117,000 £110,000 261,000 £85,000 
			 PricewaterhouseCoopers nil nil nil nil nil 
		
	
	
		HM Customs & Excise
		
			 Spend £ 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 
		
		
			 Accenture plc£57,479 £6,181,215 
			 Andersen Consulting£245,340  
			 Deloitte & Touche £161,301 £248,503 &pound£231,791 £876,061 £38,748 
			 Ernst & Young £357,450 £397,528 £108,256 £253,153 £215,748 
			 KPMG £37,167 £282,528 £255,856 £214,190 £1,237,316 
			 PricewaterhouseCoopers  £153,204 £207,495 £243,254 £111,356 
		
	
	
		Inland Revenue
		
			 Spend £ 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 
		
		
			 Andersen Information for these years can only be provided at 
			 disproportionate cost. 
			 nil nil 
			 Deloitte & Touchenil £2,115 
			 Ernst & Young/Cap Gemini£1,937,237 £1,673,971 
			 KPMG£92,500 nil 
			 PricewaterhouseCoopers£141,101 £190,372 
		
	
	The Valuation Office—Executive Agency of the Inland Revenue
	No contracts have been let by this agency during the period in question
	
		The Royal Mint including Audit Work
		
			 Spend £ 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 
		
		
			 Andersen nil nil nil nil nil 
			 Deloitte & Touche nil nil nil nil nil 
			 Ernst & Young nil nil nil nil nil 
			 KPMG nil nil nil nil nil 
			 PricewaterhouseCoopers £99,000 £58,000 £57,000 £137,000 £51,000 
		
	
	
		Office of National Statistics
		
			 Spend £ 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 
		
		
			 Andersen Consulting nil nil nil nil nil 
			 Deloitte & Touche £14,687 nil nil £699 £15 
			 Ernst & Young nil nil nil £50 nil 
			 KPMG £44,325 £472,769 £44,325 £251,876 £191,296 
			 PricewaterhouseCoopers nil £581 nil £2,198 nil 
		
	
	
		National Savings
		
			 Spend £ 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 
		
		
			 Andersen Consulting nil £14,000 nil nil nil 
			 Deloitte & Touche nil £56,000 £799,000 £570,000 £420,000 
			 Ernst & Young nil nil nil nil nil 
			 KPMG £518,000 £999,000 nil nil nil 
			 PricewaterhouseCoopers £15,000 £310,000 £32,000 £43,000 nil 
		
	
	Government Actuaries Department
	Have not dealt with any of the companies in question for the years mentioned.

Royal Mint Shareholder Panel

Matthew Taylor: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the process by which members of the Royal Mint shareholder panel were chosen; and if he will place the terms of reference for the posts in the Library.

Ruth Kelly: In addition to civil servants, the shareholder panel's three private sector members were appointed using the principles set out in the Code of Practice for Ministerial Appointments to Public Bodies issued by the Commissioner for Public Appointments. This involved seeking nominations from approximately 130 private and public sector bodies, selection by a panel including an independent assessor and public announcement of the appointments.
	The terms of reference for the posts have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

War Debts

Bob Spink: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what outstanding liabilities there are to the United Kingdom of lend-lease loan facilities arranged during the Second World War;
	(2)  what total payments have been made to meet World War II debts owed to the United Kingdom by other countries; what debts remain unpaid; and what the schedule is of future payments to the UK;
	(3)  what the level is of First World War debt owed by the United Kingdom to the United States of America; in what year repayments were last made to the USA; and what plans he has to (a) pay off the debt and (b) cancel liability to this debt;
	(4)  what outstanding schedule of payments the United Kingdom Government will make to the USA in respect of World War II debt; and what the date is of the final payment;
	(5)  what loans and other financial liabilities incurred by the United Kingdom with the United States of America for World War II (a) have been paid and (b) are outstanding;
	(6)  what recent representations the United Kingdom Government have made to the USA for the cancellation of (a) World War I and (b) World War II debts and lend-lease loans.

Ruth Kelly: The information is as follows.
	First World War debt
	At the end of the First World War the United Kingdom debt to the United States amounted to around £850 million. Repayments of the debt were made between 1923 and 1931. In 1931, President Hoover of the United States proposed a one-year moratorium on all War debts, which allowed extensive international discussions on the general problems of debt repayment to be held. However, no satisfactory agreement was reached. In the absence of such an agreement no payments have been made to, or received from, other nations since 1934.
	At the time of the moratorium the United Kingdom was owed more by other nations (£2,269 billion) than the outstanding principal it owed the United States ($4,368 billion—at 1934 exchange rates this was around £866 million).
	Second World War debt
	Under a 1945 Agreement the United States Government lent the United Kingdom a total of $4,336 million (around £1,075 million at 1945 exchange rates) in war loans. These loans were taken out under two facilities: (i) a Line of Credit of $3,750 million (around £930 million at 1945 exchange rates); and (ii) a Lend-Lease loan facility of $586 million (around £145 million at 1945 exchange rates), which represented the settlement with the United States for Lend-Lease and Reciprocal Aid and for the final settlement of the financial claims of each government against the other arising out of the conduct of the Second World War.
	Under the Agreement the loans would be repaid in 50 annual instalments commencing in 1950. However the Agreement allowed deferral of annual payments of both principal and interest if necessary because of prevailing international exchange rate conditions and the level of the United Kingdom's foreign currency and gold reserves. The United Kingdom has deferred payments on six occasions. Repayment of the war loans to the United States Government should therefore be completed on 31 December 2006, subject to the United Kingdom not choosing to exercise its option to defer payment.
	As at 31 March 2001 principal of $346,287,953 (£243,573,154 at the exchange rate on that day) was outstanding on the loans provided by the United States Government in 1945. The Government intend to meet its obligations under the 1945 Agreement by repaying the United States Government in full the amounts lend in 1945.
	All World War II debts owed to the United Kingdom by other countries have either been repaid or settlements have been agreed with the countries concerned. Details are provided in the Finance Accounts of the United Kingdom and their successor the Supplementary Statements to the Consolidated Fund and National Loans Fund Accounts for the financial years 1945–46 to 1987–88 and the following Command Papers:
	China CM 198;
	Czechoslovakia Cmd 7798 and Cmnds 55, 56 and 2280;
	France Cmnd 6988;
	Netherlands Cmd 7358;
	Poland Cmd 6864 and 7148 and Cmnd 1057;
	Turkey Cmds 6165 and 9120; and
	USSR Cmd 7297.

Overseas Education

Jeff Ennis: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has for increasing Britain's contributions towards education in foreign countries in the next three years.

Ruth Kelly: The Government are strongly committed to achieving the Millennium Development Goals of universal primary education (UPE) in all countries by the year 2015 and gender equity in primary and secondary schooling by 2005.
	Since May 1997 the Department for International Development has committed over £600 million to education. In addition, we will be launching the Commonwealth Education Fund on 12 March. The Fund will support the achievement of universal primary education (UPE) in the poorest Commonwealth countries. The Government have pledged £10 million to kickstart the Fund, and will match donations from business and individuals pound for pound including tax relief.
	Education will continue to be given high priority under our development assistance programme because it is a precondition of development and poverty reduction.
	The UK's International Development budget has risen by 45 per cent. in real terms since 1997 and is now at the highest level ever. The ratio of Official Development Assistance to Gross National Product is on course to rise from 0.26 per cent. to 0.33 per cent. by 2003–04. We will significantly raise the amount of our development aid, and also raise its share in national income, in our next spending round covering the years up to 2005–06.

Debt Relief

Jenny Tonge: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he expects all countries eligible for assistance with debt relief under the HIPC initiative to receive debt relief; and what plans he has to raise this at the Financing for Development Conference in Mexico in March.

Ruth Kelly: The UK Government have consistently been at the forefront of the international debate on debt relief issues, and have repeatedly pushed for the process to be speeded up.
	To be eligible for assistance with debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative countries must show a commitment to poverty reduction and have an interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP). Out of 42 HIPCs in total, the UK Government are pleased that 25 have already reached decision point.
	However, of the remaining countries most are in conflict or have governance problems. For this reason the UK Government argued strongly last year for the creation of an International Monetary Fund post-conflict assistance account. This account will help these countries to make progress towards peace, good governance and a sound economic framework so that they can secure the full benefits of debt relief under the HIPC initiative.
	The UK raised these issues at the annual meetings of the IMF and World Bank last year, and will continue to do so in all appropriate international forums, including the Financing for Development Conference in Mexico in March.

Devolved Administrations (Spending)

Alex Salmond: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will publish the mathematical formula he uses to decide net change to spending for devolved administrations.

Andrew Smith: The formula was published by the Treasury in the Statement of Funding Policy in July 2000.

Special Advisers

Matthew Taylor: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his answer of 4 February 2002, Official Report, column 700W, on special advisers, if he will state the purpose of advising departmental heads of information of contacts with the media; and if he will make a statement.

Ruth Kelly: The purpose is set out in clause 9 of the code of conduct on special advisers.

Small Enterprises (Allowances)

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the answer of 14 February 2002, Official Report, column 579W, on small enterprise allowances, what use has been made of these allowances.

Dawn Primarolo: While the Inland Revenue are looking at how businesses use the scheme, it is not currently possible to draw any conclusions.

Computer Software

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what computer software complies with the Inland Revenue's payroll software standards.

Dawn Primarolo: There are currently 13 software packages which have been tested and proven to comply with the Inland Revenue payroll standard.

Inland Revenue

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the changes in Inland Revenue staff numbers between 1 January 2000 and 1 January 2002.

Dawn Primarolo: The changes in Inland Revenue staff numbers between 1 January 2000 and 1 January 2002—given in the Official Report, 4 February 2002, column 695W—are due to the net effect of various new initiatives including support for new businesses, the extension of child tax credit and the collection of student loans and in response to the Grabiner report into the informal economy. They are consistent with figures of planned annual staff usage published in the Government's Expenditure Plans, 2001–04, a copy of which is held in the Library.

Inland Revenue

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the work of the Inland Revenue Business Support Team.

Dawn Primarolo: The published Inland Revenue Annual Report for the year ending 31 March 2000 (pages 12 to 13) contains full details of the work of Inland Revenue Business Support Teams.

Enterprise Schemes

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment has been made of the economic impact of the Enterprise Investment Scheme and Venture Capital Trust schemes.

Dawn Primarolo: An independent contractor is currently undertaking research, for the Inland Revenue, into the economic effects of the EIS and VCT schemes. This work is expected to be completed in the summer.

Enterprise Management Incentives

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many companies with fewer than (a) 16 and (b) seven employees took advantage of enterprise management incentives in 2000–01.

Dawn Primarolo: Enterprise management incentives (EMI) were introduced in Finance Act 2000 as part of the Government's productivity and enterprise agenda. They are targeted, tax-advantaged share option incentives to help small companies recruit and retain the staff they need to grow. Until Finance Act 2001 there was a limit of 15 on the number of employees in a company that could be granted EMI options. In Finance Act 2001 that limit was removed and replaced with an overall limit on the value of options granted of £3 million per company.
	In January 2002 the gross asset limit, which defines the size of company that can qualify for EMI, was doubled from £15 million to £30 million. The number of people employed by a company is not relevant to the decision on whether it qualifies to grant EMI options and the information requested is not available. However, between 6 April 2000 and 5 April 2001 4,540 options were granted by 807 companies, an average of 5.6 options per company.

PRIME MINISTER

Senior Salaries

Kevin Brennan: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the report and recommendations of the Review Body on Senior Salaries.

Tony Blair: The 2002 report of the Review Body on Senior Salaries, which makes recommendations about the pay of the senior civil service, senior military personnel and the judiciary, together with the annual uprating of Parliamentary salaries, is being published today. Copies are in the Vote Office and the Library of the House. I am grateful to the Chairman and members of the Review Body for their work.
	The main recommendations of the Review Body are: Senior Civil Service (SCS): an increase from 1 April 2002 of 2.5 per cent. to the Government's final indicative rates for the minima, target rates and maxima for each pay band and a new band for Permanent Secretaries; a minimum bonus payment of 3 per cent. or £2,000, whichever is the higher, for those making the greatest contribution; and a sum equivalent to 0.4 per cent. of the total SCS pay bill to be made available for use by departments to address anomalies; Senior military: an increase from 1 April 2002 of 2.5 per cent. in the value of all points on the new incremental pay scales; and Judiciary: an increase from 1 April 2002 of 8 per cent.
	The Government have decided to accept these recommendations in full for the senior civil service and senior military. The award for the judiciary will be staged, with 3.6 per cent. payable from 1 April 2002, and the remaining 4.4 per cent. payable from 1 April 2003.
	The cost of all the awards will be met within existing departmental expenditure limits.
	Pay increases for Members of Parliament and Ministers are linked automatically to the increase in pay bands for the senior civil service. Their pay entitlement will therefore increase from 1 April 2002 by 2.5 per cent. In addition they will receive the second and final instalment of £2,000 recommended by the Review Body on Senior Salaries in its forty eighth report of March 2001.

Government Properties

Norman Baker: To ask the Prime Minister in respect of (a) the flat above No. 10 Downing Street, (b) the flat above No. 11 Downing Street, (c) the flat in 1 Carlton Gardens, (d) Flat 1 in Admiralty House, (e) Flat 2 in Admiralty House, (f) Flat 3 in Admiralty House and (g) Government House in Pimlico (i) who the present occupants are, (ii) how much has been spent on (A) routine maintenance and (B) other building works in each year since 1995 and (iii) which have their council tax liabilities met by the inhabitants.

Tony Blair: holding answer 7 February 2002.
	The flats above numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street have traditionally been the residences of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The flat in 1 Carlton Gardens is currently occupied by the President of the Council. The flats in Admiralty House and the Government House in Pimlico, which in the past have been assigned to a variety of Ministers, are currently occupied by the Deputy Prime Minister, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Home Secretary. One flat in Admiralty House is currently unoccupied.
	Payment for routine maintenance and other building works is the responsibility of the occupying Minister's department. Expenditure on work to the flat above No. 11 Downing Street is as follows:
	1997–98: £16,471;
	1998–99: £48,336;
	1999–00: £32,189;
	2000–01: £37,501.
	Figures for 1995 to 1997 are not available in this form.
	The level and responsibility for payment of council tax is determined on whether the property is the Minister's main or secondary residence. If a main residence, the responsibility for payment of the tax falls to the Minister. I am responsible for meeting the full cost of the council tax on the flat above number 11 Downing Street.

Government Properties

Norman Baker: To ask the Prime Minister how many receptions have been held at No. 10 Downing Street since 1 May 1997; and if he will list (a) the date, (b) the purpose, (c) the host, (d) the estimated number in attendance and (e) the cost to public funds of each reception.

Tony Blair: holding answer 7 February 2002
	The programme of events at No. 10 is designed to give access to as many people as possible and includes regular children's tea parties and receptions for a wide cross-section of the community.
	Over 280 official and charity receptions have been held at 10 Downing Street since 1 May 1997. I have placed a list in the Library.
	Total costs are not available in the form requested. However, the total cost to my office for all official entertainment at 10 Downing Street and Chequers was as follows:
	1997–98: £43,777;
	1998–99: £53,639;
	1999–00: £60,652;
	2000–01: £72,790.
	The costs of the charity receptions are funded by the charities involved.
	As was the practice under previous administrations, I have hosted a number of political events at Downing Street. The costs of these were met by the Labour Party.
	
		Official and charity receptions hosted by the Prime Minister and Mrs. Blair
		
			 Date 
		
		
			 1997 
			 13 May Prime Minister Reception—Eve of Session 120 
			 14 June Prime Minister Reception—Trooping the Colour 100 
			 26 June Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 40 
			 2 July Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 15 July Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 22 July Prime Minister Reception—Design Industry 150 
			 30 July Prime Minister Reception—General 200 
			 8 October Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 15 October Prime Minister Reception—General 200 
			 30 October Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 27 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 10 December Prime Minister Reception—General 200 
			 18 December Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 1998 
			 29 January Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/ Children 40 
			 11 February Prime Minister Reception—New Deal n/a 
			 9 March Prime Minister Reception—New Designers' Competition n/a 
			 26 March Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 26 March Prime Minister Reception—Voluntary Sector 200 
			 1 April Prime Minister Tea—Women's Magazine Editors n/a 
			 6 April Prime Minister Reception—Eur Football Leaders n/a 
			 23 April Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 27 April Prime Minister Reception—Crime and Drugs 200 
			 1 May Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 13 May Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 21 May Prime Minister Reception—Education 200 
			 2 June Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 10 June Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 13 June Prime Minister Trooping the Colour 120 
			 18 June Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 1 July Prime Minister Reception—Health 200 
			 2 July Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 23 July Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 8 September Mrs. Blair Reception—Women Magazine Editors n/a 
			 17 September Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 6 October Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 21 October Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 27 October Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 17 November Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 18 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 23 November Prime Minister Reception—Eve of Session 120 
			 30 November Prime Minister Reception—Development n/a 
			 2 December Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 8 December Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 14 December Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 1999 
			 27 January Prime Minister Reception—Work & Leisure 100 
			 28 January Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 28 January Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 9 February Prime Minister Reception—Education 200 
			 15 February Prime Minister Technology College Trusts n/a 
			 18 February Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 24 February Mrs. Blair Tea—Readers of Women's Weekly 30 
			 23 February Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 29 February Mrs. Blair Tea—Gold Start Awards n/a 
			 10 March Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 11 March Prime Minister Reception—Millennium Lecture on Science 100 
			 11 April Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 15 April Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 15 April Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 19 April Prime Minister Reception—Regional Press Association 80 
			 11 May Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 13 May Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 20 May Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 27 May Prime Minister Reception—Wealth Creation 100 
			 12 June Prime Minister Trooping the Colour 120 
			 14 June Prime Minister Reception—Older People 100 
			 15 June Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 23 June Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 5 July Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 7 July Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 15 July Prime Minister Reception—Education 100 
			 19 July Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 14 September Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 20 September Prime Minister Reception—British Fashion Council 500 
			 13 October Prime Minister Reception—Arts & Culture 100 
			 27 October Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 4 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 8 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 16 November Prime Minister Reception—Eve of Session 100 
			 18 November Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 25 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 18 November Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 8 December Prime Minister Reception—Britishness 100 
			 13 December Prime Minister Reception—Armed Forces 350 
			 15 December Mrs. Blair Tea—Women's Own Children of Courage 30 
			 16 December Mrs. Blair Tea MP's/Children 70 
			 2000 
			 17 January Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 22 January Prime Minister Reception—Emergency Services 200 
			 25 January Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 2 February Prime Minister Reception—Rural Community 200 
			 7 February Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 24 February Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 28 February Prime Minister Reception—NHS Doctors 200 
			 29 February Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 1 March Mrs. Blair Charity 27 
			 2 March Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 6 March Prime Minister Reception—Health 100 
			 14 March Prime Minister Reception—Top 50 Schools 80 
			 15 March Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 22 March Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 27 March Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 29 March Prime Minister Tea—Daily Star Awards 20 
			 30 March Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 10 April Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 12 April Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 17 April Prime Minister Reception—Press Lobby 100 
			 10 May Prime Minister Reception—UK/Caribbean 200 
			 15 June Prime Minister Tea—Police Bravery Awards 110 
			 17 June Prime Minister Trooping the Colour 130 
			 28 June Prime Minister Reception—Primary Care Sector 200 
			 25 July Prime Minister Tea—Football Foundation Launch 40 
			 13 September Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 3 October Prime Minister Reception—Student Press 30 
			 4 October Prime Minister Reception—Better Buildings 200 
			 17 October Prime Minister Reception—Museum of TV & Radio 100 
			 1 November Prime Minister Reception—Ethnic Press 75 
			 8 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 9 November Prime Minister Charity 30 
			 14 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 23 November Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 4 December Prime Minister Reception—Environment 100 
			 5 December Prime Minister Reception—Eve of Session 105 
			 12 December Mrs. Blair Tea—Women's Own Children of Courage 28 
			 14 December Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children ? 
			 2001 
			 9 January Prime Minister Reception—Regional Editors 100 
			 11 January Prime Minister Reception—Olympic Games 100 
			 22 January Prime Minister Reception—Floods 200 
			 25 January Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 40 
			 6 February Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 15 February Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 26 February Prime Minister Reception—NHS Doctors 200 
			 27 February Prime Minister Reception—Radio Academy's News 175 
			 28 February Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 8 March Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 12 March Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 14 March Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 26 March Prime Minister Reception—Childcare 150 
			 28 March Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 4 April Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 5 April Mrs. Blair Tea—1951 Women European Tour 17 
			 20 April Mrs. Blair Tea—World Travel Leaders 65 
			 22 May Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 13 June Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 16 June Prime Minister Trooping the Colour 120 
			 19 June Prime Minister Reception—Eve of Session 100 
			 25 June Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 26 June Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 27 June Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 3 July Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 5 July Prime Minister Tea—Police Bravery Awards 120 
			 9 July Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 23 July Prime Minister Reception—NHS 200 
			 10 September Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 17 September Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 19 September Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 24 September Prime Minister Reception—Policing 200 
			 24 October Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 29 October Prime Minister Reception—Higher Education 200 
			 31 October Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 1 November Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 56 
			 8 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 8 November Prime Minister Reception—President of Pakistan 40 
			 14 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 19 November Prime Minister Reception—Women's Media 70 
			 20 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 27 November Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 4 December Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 6 December Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 40 
			 7 December Mrs. Blair Tea—MP's/Children 70 
			 10 December Mrs. Blair Tea—Women in Public Services 30 
			 12 December Mrs. Blair Tea—Children of Courage 30 
			 17 December Prime Minister Reception—Africa 100 
			 18 December Mrs. Blair Charity 50 
			 2002 
			 9 January Prime Minister Reception—Regional Newspaper Editors 80 
			 17 January Prime Minister Reception—Faith Community 180 
			 21 January Prime Minister Reception—Communications Industry 200 
			 22 January Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 30 January Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 4 February Mrs. Blair Charity 40 
			 5 February Mrs. Blair Charity 40

Mr. Alastair Campbell

Tim Collins: To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish (a) the latest functions and (b) the salary of Mr. Alastair Campbell; and what changes have been made to them following the announcement of his new role relating to the Central Office of Information.

Tony Blair: holding answer 26 February 2002
	Alastair Campbell is appointed under Article 3(3) of the Civil Service Order in Council. He is responsible for Communication and Strategy and in that role covers the work of the Press Office, the Strategic Communications Unit and the Research and Information Unit.
	The Cabinet Office have already announced that following the quinquennial review of the Central Office of Information the Chief Executive of the COI will have an additional role as the Government's chief adviser on marketing communications and information campaigns and works with the Director of Communications and Strategy at No. 10. This will strengthen the co-ordination and planning of departmental publicity strategies across Whitehall and changes should be in place by 1 April 2002. The Chief Executive of the COI remains fully accountable to Cabinet Office Ministers for the work of the COI, and they remain accountable to Parliament. Individual departments remain responsible for individual campaigns.
	Under the terms of the Order in Council Alastair Campbell is not restricted to an advisory role and is allowed to direct and manage permanent civil servants. On pay, I refer the hon. Member to the answer provided to the hon. Member for Reigate (Mr. Blunt) on 6 February 2002, Official Report, column 850W.

Official Visits

Don Foster: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the official visits within the UK outside London he made in 2001 giving for each trip (a) the origin and destination and (b) the mode of travel used; and what guidance was used on the choice of mode of travel for official visits.

Tony Blair: In 2001, I have undertaken the following official visits within the UK outside of London.
	
		
			 Date Destination 
		
		
			 9 January Bristol 
			 25–26 January Teeside 
			 1–2 February Kettering, Birmingham 
			 18 February Glasgow 
			 1–2 March Gloucester, Swansea 
			 7–9 March Aldergrove, Inverness 
			 14–15 March Teeside 
			 22–24 March Carlisle, Exeter 
			 27 March Worcester 
			 30 March Carlisle, Newcastle 
			 3 April Colchester 
			 3 April Cardiff 
			 6 April Leeds/Bradford 
			 11 April Exeter/Torquay 
			 18–19 April Teeside 
			 26 April Carlisle, Cumbria, East Midlands 
			 4 May Teeside 
			 22 June Teeside 
			 26–27 July Carlisle, Penrith, Keswick, Hull 
			 1–2 September Edinburgh, Aberdeen 
			 7–8 September Teeside 
			 11 September Brighton 
			 30 October Bristol, Cardiff 
			 5 November Birmingham 
			 22–23 November Birmingham, Teeside 
			 6 December Reading 
			 10 December Essex 
			 20–21 December Teeside 
		
	
	My visits covered a range of matters including health, education, foot and mouth disease and tourism.
	I travel making the most efficient and cost-effective arrangements. My travel arrangements are in accordance with the arrangements for official travel set out in chapter 7 of the Ministerial Code, and the accompanying guidance document, Travel by Ministers.

Official Visits

Don Foster: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the official visits to (a) Paris and (b) Brussels made by him in 2001 and the mode of travel used; and what guidance was used on the choice of mode of travel for such visits.

Tony Blair: Lists of overseas visits undertaken by Cabinet Ministers costing more than £500 during the period 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2001 were placed in the Library of the House and published in the Official Report on 20 July 2001, column 467W. The list for the period 1 April 2001 to 31 March 2002 will be published as soon as possible after the end of the current financial year.
	I travel making the most efficient and cost-effective arrangements. My travel arrangements are in accordance with the arrangements for official travel set out in chapter 7 of the Ministerial Code, and the accompanying guidance document, Travel by Ministers.

Catering Services

John Bercow: To ask the Prime Minister what the cost was of (a) in-house canteen and (b) other catering services provided by his office in each of the last four years.

Tony Blair: My office does not have an in-house canteen.
	For the total cost to my Office for all official entertainment at 10 Downing Street and Chequers, I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave the hon. Member for Lewes (Norman Baker) today at column 1444W.

Mr. Martin Sixsmith

Nick Gibb: To ask the Prime Minister if he will initiate an inquiry into the conduct of Sir Richard Mottram in relation to Mr. Martin Sixsmith.

Tony Blair: No. Sir Richard Mottram has already provided a detailed account of his involvement in matters relating to Mr. Martin Sixsmith.

United Nations

David Kidney: To ask the Prime Minister which Minister has responsibility for UK relations with the United Nations.

Tony Blair: The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane).

No. 10 Delivery Unit

Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the names of those in the No. 10 Delivery Unit, who are responsible for overseeing the work in the areas of (a) transport, (b) health, (c) crime and asylum and (d) education.

Tony Blair: The Delivery Unit reports to me under the day to day supervision of the Minister for the Cabinet Office, Lord Macdonald, and is headed by Michael Barber. The unit is working closely with the Treasury and other Departments to ensure that the Government achieve their delivery priorities during this Parliament across the key areas of public service: health, education, crime, asylum and transport. At 1 January 2002, 17 full-time and three part-time civil servants were employed in the Delivery Unit, and no special advisers.

Business Contracts

Christopher Chope: To ask the Prime Minister, 
	(1)  pursuant to his answer of 25 February 2002, Ref 36802, Official Report, column 701W, under what provision of the Code of Practice on Access to Government information he has declined to say on how many occasions in the past two years he has written to foreign Governments about the award of contracts to companies with British interests.
	(2)  on how many occasions in the past two years he has written to the Prime Minister of Romania about the award of contracts to companies with British interests.

Tony Blair: I have nothing further to add to my previous answer for the reasons I explained. It is not normal practice to release letters from the Prime Minister to another Head of Government under exemption 1(b) of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information. Exemption 13 of the Code also applies with regard to commercial confidentiality.

Business Contracts

Adam Price: To ask the Prime Minister 
	(1)  if he will name the person or persons responsible for drafting the letter to the Romanian Prime Minister regarding LNM-Ispat International's contract for the SIDEX steel plant;
	(2)  how many drafts were made of the letter to the Romanian Prime Minister, Adrian Nastasi, regarding LNM-Ispat International's contract for the SIDEX steel plant;
	(3)  on whose advice and authority the letter to the Romanian Prime Minister regarding LNM-Ispat International's contract for the SIDEX steel plant was (a) drafted, (b) signed and (c) sent.

Tony Blair: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him and the hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Turner) on 14 February 2002, Official Report, columns 610–11W.

Business Contracts

Andrew Turner: To ask the Prime Minister on behalf of how many companies (a) in the United Kingdom, (b) on the Isle of Wight and (c) in Leicestershire he has written to overseas leaders seeking support for investment contracts since 1997.

Tony Blair: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him and the hon. Member for East Carmarthen and Dinefwr (Adam Price) on Thursday 14 February, Official Report, columns 610–11W.

Hammond Inquiry

Andrew Turner: To ask the Prime Minister for what reason he decided to re-open Sir Anthony Hammond's inquiry into the Hinduja passport affair; how many representations, and from whom, he received to do so; and when the first such representation was received.

Tony Blair: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave the hon. Member for Lewes (Norman Baker) on Tuesday 5 February 2002, Official Report, column 864W.

DEFENCE

Joint Force Harrier

Nick Palmer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his future plans are for Joint Force Harrier; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: I have agreed an investment plan to take forward Joint Force Harrier (JFH) into the era of Future Joint Combat Aircraft (FJCA) and Future Carriers.
	The Strategic Defence Review (SDR) included a commitment to establish JFH, building on the success of Royal Navy and RAF Harrier aircraft operations in joint carrier air groups. This was a radical initiative to form a truly joint, flexible and deployable force optimised for the demands of the new strategic environment. JFH currently operates two aircraft types––Sea Harrier FA2, an air defence aircraft flown by RN personnel, and Harrier GR7, a ground attack/reconnaissance aircraft flown by RAF personnel. The plan has been for both the Sea Harrier FA2 and Harrier GR7 to be replaced by a common aircraft type. This is currently designated the FJCA with an In Service Date of 2012.
	Work has been taking place on a migration plan to take forward JFH into the era of the FJCA and the future aircraft carrier. We have concluded that Joint Force Harrier should migrate to an all Harrier GR force, maximising investment in one aircraft type. It is planned to upgrade the GR7 to GR9 standard to ensure a credible expeditionary offensive capability until the aircraft leaves service. To achieve this, aircraft systems will be enhanced to extend their lives and give the Harrier the capability to operate with smart weapons.
	Given the Harrier GR9's ability in future to employ smart weapons world-wide by day and night from land and sea and the increased emphasis on carrier based offensive air-power in the SDR and confirmed by the emerging conclusions of our post-11 September work, the Sea Harrier FA2 will be withdrawn earlier than planned, by 2006. The Sea Harrier entered service in 1979, and will start to become obsolescent as this decade progresses.
	As a consequence of its earlier withdrawal from service, the planned relocation of Sea Harrier FA2 aircraft from RNAS Yeovilton to RAF Cottesmore and RAF Wittering in 2003 will not now proceed. The relocation of RN personnel will go ahead but slightly later than currently planned, over the period 2004 to 2006. By 1 April 2007, JFH will have migrated to an all Harrier GR9 force by roughly equal numbers of RN and RAF personnel. These proposals will be subject to consultation with the Trade Unions in the normal way.
	This plan will significantly enhance the offensive strike capability of our aircraft carriers pending introduction to service of the FJCA.

Nimrod MRA4

Nick Palmer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has changed his procurement plans for the Nimrod MRA4.

Lewis Moonie: The Nimrod MRA4 will replace the Nimrod MR2 as the RAF's new maritime patrol aircraft Recent work on future maritime reconnaissance capabilities has shown that the operational tasks of the Nimrod MRA4 aircraft can be carried out with a smaller fleet than originally envisaged. This will allow us to reduce the number of aircraft on order from 21 to 18. This revised approach will allow the RAF to meet all the tasks for which the aircraft is being procured while delivering better value for money.
	This judgment reflects a number of factors. The submarine threat, while still prevalent worldwide, has not developed as expected when the production contract was signed in 1996. Moreover, the Nimrod MRA4 will also offer a markedly greater capability compared to the MR2 it succeeds, through improved aircraft and sensor performance. Finally, discussions with BAE Systems, the prime contractor, have identified potential in-service support options to maximise aircraft availability for operational tasking.
	The Defence Procurement Agency is working with BAE Systems on an incremental approach to delivery for Nimrod MRA4. This includes the acceptance of aircraft in two steps. An initial capability will be provided by the time of first contracted aircraft delivery in August 2004 with the full specification being met by the time of the seventh aircraft delivery and entry into service which is contracted for March 2005. The reduced order will affect only the last three aircraft of the previously planned production run.
	In accordance with the partnership principle of Smart Acquisition, agreement has been reached with BAE. Systems to maximise the financial benefits to the Ministry of Defence of this reduced order while incentivising the company appropriately. The reduction in procurement costs will be agreed in detail with the company. On the basis of current assumptions, the smaller fleet is expected to reduce support costs alone by some £360 million.

AWE

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many British universities have research contracts with AWE; and if he will list them.

Lewis Moonie: AWE plc currently have research contracts with a total of 24 British universities. Confidentiality clauses in these contracts make it necessary for AWE to seek confirmation from each university that they are willing to have their names released. 21 of the universities have so consented and are listed below:
	University of Birmingham
	University of Bristol
	University of Cambridge
	Cardiff University
	University of Dundee
	University of Glasgow
	Herriot-Watt University
	Royal Holloway University of London
	Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine
	University of Kent at Canterbury
	University of Liverpool
	University College of London
	Loughborough University Consultants Ltd
	Manchester Metropolitan University
	University of Nottingham
	University of Reading
	University of Southampton
	University of Surrey
	University of Warwick
	University of Bangor Wales
	University of York

Publications

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence in respect of the publications issued by the Central Corporate Communications Division in each of the last four years, what was (a) the circulation, (b) the cost and (c) the purpose of each.

Lewis Moonie: The information requested for the main publications produced by our central corporate communication division, and its predecessors, where known, is shown in the following tables.
	
		Financial year 1998–99
		
			 Publication Cost (£)1 Circulation (numbers)2 Purpose 
		
		
			 Strategic Defence Review 71,8801 10,000 Published outcome of the Strategic Defence Review 
			 Defence Booklets 55,988 122,000 Information booklets on a variety of defence subjects 
			 Annual Report of Defence Activity 1997–98 19,051 75,000 Reports defence activity 
			 XSanctuary" 24,194 24,000 Annual publication describing MoD conservation activity 
			 Defence Factsheets 11,991 120,000 (total) A series of folded A4-leaflets giving general information on a specific defence issue 
			 Ministry of Defence Performance Report 1997–98 4,2273 510 Reports on MoD performance in the previous year 
			 XFocus" 167,7914 55,000 (per month) Monthly in-house newspaper, for MoD staff 
		
	
	
		Financial year 1999–2000
		
			 Publication Cost (£)1 Circulation (numbers)2 Purpose 
		
		
			 Defence White Paper 1999 26,0521 5,000 To inform Parliament and the public of defence activity and policies 
			 Defence Annual Report and Mission Booklets 17,514 70,000 Describe defence mission, and reports defence activity 
			 Defence Booklets 25,373 15,000 
			 (total) Information booklets on a variety of defence subjects 
			 Defence Factsheets 47,868 436,700 
			 (total) A series of folded A4-leaflets giving general information on a specific defence issue 
			 Factsheets (in Welsh language) 8,439 28,000 
			 (total) As above, in Welsh language 
			 Large text/braille/audio material 24,155 2,100 large 
			 print 
			 booklets 
			 400 audio 
			 cassettes 
			 1,200 braille 
			 booklets 
			 (totals) Provision of defence information to people who are visually impaired 
			 XSanctuary" 21,920 24,000 Annual publication describing MoD conservation activity 
			 XFocus" 174,3294 55,000 
			 (per month) Monthly in-house newspaper, for MoD staff 
			 Ministry of Defence Performance Report 1998–99 7,1045 600 Reports on MoD performance in the previous year 
		
	
	
		Financial year 2000–01
		
			 Publication Cost (£)1 Circulation (numbers)2 Purpose 
		
		
			 Defence Factsheets 32,832 390,500 (total) A series of folded A4-leaflets giving general information on a specific defence issue 
			 Factsheets (in Welsh language) 10,480 32,000 As above, in Welsh language 
			 Defence Booklets 38,983 35,900 Information booklets on a variety of defence subjects 
			 Kosovo Lessons from the Crisis 2,5003 5,000 Command paper on Kosovo campaign 
			 Ministry of Defence Performance Report 1999–2000 6,803.403 800 Reports on MoD performance in the previous year 
			 XFocus" 161,9504 55,000 (per month) Monthly in-house newspaper, for MoD staff 
			 XSanctuary" 19,092 24,000 Annual publication describing MoD conservation activity 
		
	
	
		Financial year 2001–025
		
			 Publication Cost (£)1 Circulation (numbers)2 Purpose 
		
		
			 XDefence Matters" 15,626 8,000 Colour brochure explaining range of defence activities 
			 Defence booklets 21,723 10,500 
			 (total) Information booklets on a variety of defence subjects 
			 Defence Factsheets 32,170 153,700 
			 (total) A series of folded A4-leaflets giving general information on a specific defence issue 
			 XBlue Book" 5,588 2,100 Describes organisation and management of defence in the UK 
			 XSanctuary" 26,200 24,000 Annual publication describing MoD conservation activity 
			 XFocus" 105,2694 55,000 
			 (per month) Monthly in-house newspaper, for MoD staff 
			 Ministry of Defence Performance Report 2000–01 12,6103 650 Report to Parliament of MoD performance in the previous year 
			 SDR New Chapter Public Discussion paper, & leaflet 21,800 (estimated) 10.500 Discussion papers 
			 139,000 leaflets 
			  Discussion paper on the New Chapter on terrorism. 
		
	
	Notes:
	1 Cost figures consist of printing and, where appropriate, an element of design costs and/or distribution.
	2 Exact circulation numbers are difficult to obtain without incurring disproportionate costs. Figures shown (other than for XCommand" publications) are numbers printed.
	3 Costs shown for XCommand" publications are only for the copies required by the MoD, and represent a discount on the normal Stationery Office price.
	4 Costs shown for XFocus" do not include the substantial income generated from advertising revenue.
	5 Figures for the 2001–02 Financial Year show spend as at 15 February 2002.

MOD Sites (Security)

Bernard Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to increase the budget of department bodies to meet security needs following 11 September.

Adam Ingram: I will write to the hon. Member and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.

MOD Sites (Security)

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what role is played by (a) the armed forces and (b) MDP in protecting MoD sites; and if he will make a statement.

Lewis Moonie: The role of the armed services and the Ministry of Defence police in protecting MoD sites is to protect life, to protect MoD property, assets and interests, and to provide an appropriate interface with the public.
	The decision as to which form of guard force is required (armed or unarmed, military or civilian, and with or without constabulary powers) is determined at local level, to best match the prevailing requirements, following central regulations and guidance.

MOD Sites (Security)

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what powers have been given to the MDP for guarding MoD sites; and if he will make a statement.

Lewis Moonie: The Ministry of Defence Police derive their constabulary powers from the MOD Police Act 1987 which they use in policing MOD sites. A number of limited extensions, to MDP powers, were included within the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001.

Cluster Bomb

Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment of ground conditions is undertaken before deployment of cluster bombs; and what alternative weapon is deployed where ground conditions might result in an unacceptably higher failure rate.

Adam Ingram: Decisions on the most appropriate weapon for use in attack take into account a wide variety of factors, consistent with our obligations under international law. These factors include the nature of the target, the weapons available to engage the target, and the conditions prevailing at the time of the attack. Specific ground conditions in the location of an attack, the effect of those conditions on failure rates, and the potential impact of a particular failure rate are factors that cannot normally be known by those making the decisions. Using weapons that are not the most appropriate for a target would reduce the likelihood of achieving the military objective and increase the risk of collateral damage. There are often no alternative weapons to cluster bombs that would avoid these negative consequences.

Royal Ordnance Factories and Naval Dockyards (Security)

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what changes in security have been made at the Royal Ordnance factories and naval dockyards following 11 September 2001; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Security arrangements at Royal Ordnance sites are a matter for Royal Ordnance, which is a private company subject to licensing by the Health and Safety Executive and local Home Department police forces. Those Royal Ordnance sites that hold Ministry of Defence classified information are required to protect it in accordance with regulations set out in the Manual of Protective Security produced by the Cabinet Office. Their compliance with these standards is monitored by Government Security Advisers from the Security Service. It is for the Home Secretary to comment on the security of the Royal Ordnance sites in relation to the terrorist threat and to the protection of classified information.
	The security of the commercial operations at the naval dockyards is similarly primarily the responsibility of the companies concerned. In the case of Devonport and Portsmouth the commercial operations are conducted inside the perimeters of the two naval bases, and the operators therefore benefit indirectly from the physical security measures against the terrorist and other threats put in place by the Defence Logistic Organisation. The situation at Rosyth is different, in that the commercial site is outside the naval base; however, under the terms of an MOU with the contractor the MOD retains the right to insist on such additional security measures as it considers necessary to protect MOD assets and personnel. This includes the provision of armed security guarding to protect the lives of Service personnel accommodated temporarily on the commercial site. Security at naval bases has been reviewed as part of an overall survey of security of the Defence Logistic Organisation estate. While it is MOD policy not to comment on detailed matters of security, 1 can confirm that the level of security at naval bases is considered appropriate.

Integrated Biological Detention System

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much the trials of the new Integrated Biological Detection System will cost; and if he will make a statement.

Lewis Moonie: The estimated cost of the trials at Dstl of the new Integrated Biological Detection System is about £1 million.

Integrated Biological Detention System

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what companies are involved in the initial concept of trials being run for a maritime version of the new integrated Biological Detection System; and if he will make a statement.

Lewis Moonie: The trials, which were held in October last year, evaluated the potential technology options for the Maritime Biological Detection System.
	The main industrial participants were: Graseby Dynamics Ltd of Watford, together with BIRAL of Portishead; Jasmin Simtech of Nottingham, together with Bruker Daltronics, Leipzig; General Dynamics Canada.

Fast Jet Technology

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans there are to obtain laser and missile approach warners part of the Fast Jet Directed Infrared Countermeasures Laser System Technology; and if he will make a statement.

Lewis Moonie: The Ministry of Defence is currently funding a Technology Demonstration Programme into Directed Infrared Counter Measures for fast jets. This involves risk reduction work on technology to enable the acquisition and tracking of approaching missiles and the deployment of appropriate laser jamming measures. The programme does not include work on a laser beam illumination warning sensor.

US Bases (Security)

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment has been made of the security risk to US bases in the UK since 11 September 2001; and if he will make a statement.

Lewis Moonie: Security at Ministry of Defence bases is kept under constant review. It is MOD policy not to discuss detailed matters of security, or to disclose details of threat assessments.

Unmanned Air Vehicles

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the need for a carrier-based medium altitude/endurance unmanned air vehicle; and if he will make a statement.

Lewis Moonie: No decisions have yet been taken on the utility and cost effectiveness of unmanned air vehicles as part of the future carrier air group, but they remain under consideration to meet a number of requirements.

Ministry of Defence Police

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence 
	(1)  what training is given to MDP reserves; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  if he will make a statement on his Department's policy on its police reserves.

Lewis Moonie: There are no Ministry of Defence Police reserves, although there is an MDP Operational Support Unit (OSU) of fifty police officers based at MDP Headquarters at Wethersfield in Essex. In addition to receiving normal police training OSU officers are trained to provide teams for rope access, Incendiary Explosive Device searches, confined space search, chemical, biological radiological and nuclear response, personal protection for VIPs and public order duties.

Ministry of Defence Police

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the chain of command for MOD police deployed on US bases in the UK since 11 September 2001 is; and if he will make a statement.

Lewis Moonie: The Senior Ministry of Defence Police Officer at a US base remains responsible to the Chief Constable in respect of his units' constabulary duties, through the Operational Common Unit Commander. The US Station Commander is responsible for the Security of the site, and exercises day-to-day operational control over the MDP under delegated authority from the Chief Constable, MDP.

Foreign Military Staff (UK Training)

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many military staff from (a) Macedonia, (b) Bulgaria, (c) Slovakia, (d) Slovenia, (e) Albania, (f) Romania, (g) Estonia, (h) Latvia and (i) Lithuania have been involved in training in the UK in the last five years; at what cost; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Approximate numbers of personnel involved in training in the UK through the Outreach programme during the last three years are given below (figures are not held centrally prior 1999). These figures may include some civilian personnel working for the Defence Ministries of the countries referred to, as it is not possible in all cases to differentiate them.
	Personnel from countries covered by the Outreach programme come to the UK for a wide variety of training, ranging from Staff courses lasting up to one year, to seminars and short educational visits for as little as three days. Included in these figures is Arms Control training, which in some cases (XOpen Skies") involves the use of an aircraft, at high cost.
	Indicative costs are shown for 2001 only as detailed costings are not held for previous years. Places on year-long courses, which by their nature are expensive, are allocated between countries on rotation and those countries shown below with higher costs are likely to have benefited from at least one such course and in some cases from XOpen Skies" training during 2001. Not all costs involved in the activities covered in this answer fall to centrally controlled funds (i.e. support to individuals while visiting units), and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	
		
			  1999 2000 2001  
			  Numbers Numbers Numbers Cost £K 
		
		
			 Macedonia 20 27 17 126 
			 Bulgaria 57 51 52 300 
			 Slovakia 70 73 46 250 
			 Slovenia 50 37 29 131 
			 Albania 10 27 14 43 
			 Romania 66 85 56 475 
			 Estonia 36 18 24 55 
			 Latvia 28 17 20 190 
			 Lithuania 31 20 19 94 
		
	
	These activities form part of the Outreach programme in central and eastern Europe which, in turn, is part of the wider Defence Diplomacy mission. Outreach contributes to international stability by assisting countries in the region to establish democratically accountable, cost-effective armed forces capable of contributing both to national and regional security and, increasingly, to international security through participation in peace support operations.

Smart Procurement

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much money has been saved by Smart Procurement since its inception in 1998; how much it is projected to save over the next five years; and if he will make a statement.

Lewis Moonie: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 17 December 2001, Official Report, column 72W.

Deployments

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of his Department's staff have been involved in deployments to (a) Slovakia, (b) Macedonia and (c) Bulgaria in the last five years; at what costs; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: Numbers of military and civilian Ministry of Defence personnel deployed through the Outreach programme to Slovakia, Macedonia and Bulgaria during the last three years are given below (figures are not held centrally prior to this date). The figures for 1999–00 and 2000–01 were previously published in MOD Performance Reports (Cm 5000 Annex G and Cm5920 Annex H). They include members of visiting training and advisory teams and resident in-country advisers. The costs shown are approximate.
	
		
			   1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 
			  Numbers Cost £K Numbers Cost £K Numbers Cost £K 
		
		
			 Slovakia 2 75 1 120 5 154 
			 Macedonia — — 3 200 1 125 
			 Bulgaria 4 63 1 78 2 164 
		
	
	These deployments form part of the Outreach programme in central and eastern Europe which, in turn, is part of the wider Defence Diplomacy mission. Outreach contributes to international stability by assisting countries in the region to establish democratically accountable, cost-effective armed forces capable of contributing both to national and regional security and, increasingly, to international security through participation in peace support operations.
	Not all personnel taking part in Outreach activities are captured in the annually published figures. The inclusion of personnel engaged in one-off, short duration activities would distort the overall picture.
	There are Defence Attachés in the British Embassies in Bulgaria, Macedonia and Slovakia, all of whom have support staff. They are also not included.
	In addition to Outreach deployments, the UK contributed some 2,000 personnel to NATO's Task Force Harvest, which was deployed to Macedonia between 23 August and 25 September 2001. The projected cost for operations in Macedonia for the Financial Year 2001–02 is £8.7 million.

Deployments

Nicholas Soames: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence where the British Armed Forces are deployed as at 1 February.

Adam Ingram: The latest available figures are for deployment of UK Regular Forces as at 1 January 2002.
	
		
			  All Services Naval Service Army RAF 
		
		
			 United Kingdom 165,206 37,948 79,874 47,384 
			 Continental Europe 25,132 372 23,041 1,719 
			 Cyprus 3,301 7 2,149 1,145 
			 Gibraltar 402 229 71 102 
			 Other Mediterranean, Near East and Gulf 3,679 1,257 697 1,725 
			 Far East 290 54 212 24 
			 Other locations 6,045 1,817 3,177 1,051 
			 Global Total 204,055 41,684 109,221 53,150 
		
	
	Figures are for UK Regular Forces (including both Trained and Untrained personnel), and therefore exclude Gurkhas, Full Time Reserve personnel, the Home Service battalions of the Royal Irish Regiment, mobilised reservists and Naval Activated Reservists.

C-17 Globemasters

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many C-17 Globemasters the armed forces own; whether Globemasters are deployed in Afghanistan; what plans he has for further purchase of the Globemaster; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: I refer the hon. Member to the answers I gave him on 17 December 2001, Official Report, column 72W, and on 7 February 2002, Official Report, column 1088W, to the hon. Member for North Wiltshire (Mr. Gray).

Framework Agreement

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what projects, if any have been designated Co-operative Armaments Programmes under the Six-Nation Framework Agreement.

Lewis Moonie: None. Whilst the harmonisation of military requirements is a specific part of the Framework Agreement, the work in this area is designed to examine the scope for meeting military requirements jointly. The intention is that this work should act as a foundation for the establishment of potential co-operative armaments programmes, but it is too early to expect the Framework Agreement to have generated any such programmes at this stage of its implementation. However, it is also the intention that existing co-operative armaments programmes might benefit from work on the implementation of the Framework Agreement. An example of this is the proposed creation of a Global Export Licence to simplify the licensing process on co-operative programmes.

Correspondence

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 19 December 2001, Official Report, column 343W, ref. 24020, when he intends to write to the hon. Member; and if he will place a copy in the Library.

Adam Ingram: I have written to the hon. Member today to explain the delay. My officials are continuing to compile the information requested and I will provide a substantive reply as quickly as possible. A copy will be placed in the Library of the House.

RAF Bases (Commercial Operations)

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with the Civil Aviation Authority about the suitability of RAF Lyneham for commercial airline operations.

Adam Ingram: No discussions have taken place to date between the Civil Aviation Authority and the Ministry of Defence about the suitability of RAF Lyneham for commercial airline operations, although such discussions will be part of the overall assessment process.

RAF Bases (Commercial Operations)

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with Richard Branson and executives of Virgin about the commercial future of RAF Brize Norton.

Adam Ingram: No discussions have taken place between the Ministry of Defence and Mr. Richard Branson or other executives of Virgin about the commercial future of RAF Brize Norton.

RAF Bases (Commercial Operations)

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the physical contours of RAF Lyneham conform to the CAA's safety requirements for commercial airline operations.

Adam Ingram: RAF Lyneham is regulated by Ministry of Defence safety guidelines and not guidelines set out by the Civil Aviation Authority, which is responsible for civil airfields. However, the hon. Member will wish to be aware that I have directed that the issue of Civil Aviation Authority licensing of the three stations will be addressed as part on the on-going Strategic Review of RAF Lyneham, RAF St Mawgan and RAF Brize Norton.

Army HQ

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 17 December 2001, Official Report, column 340W, when the final assessment of the costs of moving the Army's northern headquarters from York to Edinburgh will have been made; what increase there has been in the number of people working at Craigiehall and York; and what military reason there was for the move from York to Craigiehall.

Adam Ingram: The final assessment of the costs of locating the Army's northern headquarters in Edinburgh should be completed in the early summer of this year. This work will also confirm manpower numbers but initial indications are that there has been an increase of some 170 at Craigiehall and of some 14 at York resulting from the move of headquarters, and the relocation of other organisations. The military judgements that led to the location of the headquarters in Edinburgh took into account a number of issues and were finely balanced. The conclusion was that the role of divisional headquarters could be discharged from either York or Edinburgh.

Tours of Duty

Paul Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the units in the Army that have had an average interval between operational tours of (a) over 24 months and (b) under 24 months in each year since 1997; and if he will make a statement.

Adam Ingram: The following table shows the average interval between operational tours by individual arms/corps covering the years 1996–97 to 2000–01.
	
		Average tour intervals
		
			 Year (April to March) Royal Armoured Corps Royal Artillery Royal Engineers Royal Signals Infantry Royal Logistic Corps1 
		
		
			 1966–97 25 21 12 19 21 — 
			 1997–98 19 36 17 21 22 — 
			 1998–99 30 19 24 21 27 — 
			 1999–2000 14 25 13 10 15 30 
			 2000–01 26 42 34 24 22 30 
		
	
	1 Not calculated until 1999–2000.

Tours of Duty

James Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will publish the report written by Colonel Curran Snagge entitled XThe Command Structure in the UK" examining the move of the Army's northern headquarters from York to Edinburgh.

Adam Ingram: No.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

LNM Holdings

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the Government's policy is on support for a further application to the EBRD by LNM Holdings for support for the takeover of Sidex Steel.

Hilary Benn: The EBRD exists to help restructure the economies of former communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe. We support all responsible projects that serve this purpose.
	The EBRD Board has not been approached with a specific proposal for a further loan to Ispat-Sidex. If a proposal is received we will consider it on its merits.

LNM Holdings

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what discussions took place between her Department and other departments regarding the Government's support for the loan application to the EBRD by LNM Holdings.

Hilary Benn: As is routine, DFID officials invited comments from other interested departments in preparing briefing. There were no discussions.

LNM Holdings

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if she will set out the reasons for the Government's support for the loan application to the EBRD by LNM Holdings.

Hilary Benn: The EBRD exists to help restructure the economies of former communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe. We support all responsible projects that serve this purpose.
	EBRD's loan to Ispat-Sidex is providing important support for Romania's economic reform and progress towards EC accession. The World Bank identified the privatisation of the company as a key requirement for economic reform in Romania.

External Contracts

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development which non-accounting and non-information technology external organisations have won new contracts with (a) her Department and (b) executive agencies in each of the past five years.

Hilary Benn: The information requested is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

External Contracts

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if she will list the 30 largest contracts awarded by her Department from (a) May 1997 to April 1998, (b) May 1998 to April 1999, (c) May 1999 to April 2000, (d) May 2000 to April 2001 and (e) May 2001 to the latest date, indicating in each case the value of the contracts and the companies with which the contracts were placed.

Hilary Benn: The information has been placed in the House of Commons Library.

Sudan

Jenny Tonge: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment she has made of the impact of the attack on a food aid distribution site in the village of Bien, Western Upper Nile region of Southern Sudan, on the distribution of food aid in that region.

Hilary Benn: The attack should not affect distribution of food aid in the region. The parties to the conflict in Sudan have agreed that they will not target humanitarian operations and they are, in any case, obliged under the Geneva Conventions not to target civilians. Something clearly went wrong in Bien on 20 February, and we have demanded an explanation from the Government of Sudan. In the meantime we expect that the World Food Programme will take extra care not to attempt to distribute food near areas where fighting is ongoing.

Burkina Faso

Caroline Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what action she is taking to improve human rights in Burkina Faso.

Denis MacShane: I have been asked to reply.
	We have no resident representation in Burkina Faso, but our Embassy in Abidjan maintains regular contact with government, opposition and NGO representatives on human rights issues and raises our concerns with the government about the human rights situation. The UN Expert Panel Report on Liberia, published in October 2001, contained evidence that Burkina Faso was involved in arms shipments to Liberia in breach of UN sanctions. We have made clear to the Government of Burkina Faso that it should cease undermining UN sanctions by providing support for the regime of Charles Taylor in Liberia.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards

David Winnick: To ask the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood) representing the House of Commons Commission, how many complaints are under investigation by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.

Archy Kirkwood: This is a matter for the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and the Committee on Standards and Privileges.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Long-term Sick Leave

Jenny Tonge: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what guidelines he has published regarding the treatment of employees returning to work after long-term sick leave.

John Hutton: I have been asked to reply.
	We do not publish guidelines for all employers regarding the treatment of employees returning after long-term sick leave.
	However, current policy is to encourage rehabilitation and/or redeployment of staff who have been long-term sick, and to initiate action to rehabilitate them back to work as early as possible. To this end, we are working with the Department for Work and Pensions and the Health and Safety Executive on job retention and rehabilitation pilots to test different health and employment strategies to help people with long-term sickness or disability to remain in their jobs.
	We have commissioned guidance for health and social services on promoting employment opportunities for people with mental health problems to meet the requirement of Standard One of the National Service Framework for mental health.
	As far as health and social services employees are concerned, guidance on treatment of staff returning from long-term sickness is part of XThe Management of Health, Safety and Welfare Issues for NHS Staff" issued under the cover of HSC(98) 064 and also in XManaging Sickness Absence in the NHS" published through the Strategic HR Intelligence Networks in July 2000 and re-issued in November 2001.

Benefit Fraud Inspectorate

Vernon Coaker: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when he will publish the inspection report of the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate in respect of Torbay Borough Council.

Malcolm Wicks: The Benefit Fraud Inspectorate report was published today in respect of Torbay Borough Council and copies of the report have been placed in the Library.
	The report identifies both strengths and weaknesses in the benefits services at Torbay. The Council is commended for good customer service. There are three offices that claimants can visit, telephone calls to the office are answered promptly and Torbay is currently revising its claim form in line with the BFI Model Claim Form.
	Inspectors found that backlogs of work were not being addressed and the time taken to process claims was very poor with only 45 per cent. being cleared within the 14-day target. These backlogs were also reducing the ability of the council to ensure that renewal claims were being assessed without a break in payment.
	The report finds that changes in circumstances which could lead to overpayment of benefit were not given sufficient priority by the benefits section. An experimental scheme for the sharing of information between the council, the Employment Service and the Benefits Agency on changes of clients' circumstances was identified as an excellent initiative.
	Inspectors considered there were weaknesses in all stages of dealing with overpayments and the report makes recommendations on tackling this issue. Since 1997 the debt owed to the council has increased by nearly £1 million.
	The council's clear progress in developing a counter-fraud strategy, fully supported by members, was also recognised. Its process of verifying of claims for benefit was found to be up to the required standard. The report concludes that the fraud section would benefit from additional resources to build on the effective work that has already been undertaken.
	The report makes recommendations to help the council address weaknesses and to improve the administration of Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit, as well as counter-fraud activities.
	My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is now considering the report and will be asking the council for its proposals in response to the findings and recommendations of the BFI.

Benefit Fraud Inspectorate

Vernon Coaker: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when he will publish the inspection report of the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate in respect of the London Borough of Southwark.

Malcolm Wicks: The Benefit Fraud Inspectorate report was published today in respect of the London Borough of Southwark and copies of the report have been placed in the Library.
	This follow-up inspection and report shows that the council has responded very positively to the findings of the first BFI report of June 1999 and that many recommendations have been implemented in full. Southwark also have ongoing projects to address many of the remaining recommendations. Inspectors found significant improvements in the quality of anti-fraud work and a reduction in the previous weaknesses in benefits administration.
	The report commends the work done to improve the verification of claims; on the process of making payments on account; and on procedural guidance for fraud and overpayment staff.
	At the time of the second inspection some problems remained to be addressed. These included the use of more than one type of claim form. Since the inspection, however, the council has introduced a new single form based on the BFI Model Claim Form.
	Inspectors found that there had been an improvement in the clearance time for claims. In 1999 only 20 per cent. of claims were cleared within the 14-day target. At the second inspection this was found to have improved to 52 per cent. Southwark should do more to ensure that all information is available when claims are first received.
	The report also found that the service to customers needed to be improved, in particular long delays for telephone callers. Southwark had recognised this poor level of service and has introduced a new telephone system.
	The large backlog of work, which in 1999 stood at 19,000 claims, had been reduced but at the time of the second inspection the council estimated that a backlog of 5,000 claims was outstanding. This is believed to have fallen further but the council did not have a formal plan to clear the remaining arrears.
	The report notes that a comprehensive approach was being taken to training. It also recognises that the council has improved the liaison between benefits and fraud as well as with the Housing Department.
	Inspectors found that progress against BFI's recommendations in relation to overpayments of benefit had been slow. Further recommendations to improve effectiveness are made in this report.
	Significant improvement is noted in the quality of Southwark's fraud investigations. Preparation, record keeping and general file maintenance was found to be of a good standard and this was supported by a high standard of staff training. The 1999 BFI recommendation that the council review its anti-fraud strategy had been successfully implemented.
	The London Borough of Southwark is an excellent example of an authority responding positively and effectively to weaknesses identified by the BFI and thus providing a more secure and accurate benefits service to its community.
	The report makes recommendations to help the council address the remaining weaknesses and to further improve the administration of Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit, as well as counter-fraud activities.
	My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is now considering the report and will be asking the council for its proposals in response to the findings and recommendations of the BFI.

Pickering Review

Tim Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the original scope was of the inquiry into pensions which he asked Mr. Alan Pickering to conduct for his Department; and whether and to what extent that scope has been modified.

Ian McCartney: The Pickering simplification review is a comprehensive review of private pensions legislation. It will propose a package of options for simplifying the regulatory framework, consistent with the maintenance of proper protection for pension members. A consultation document for the review was published on 19 October 2001 and is available in the Library. This included the terms of reference of the review, which have not been changed.

Pensions

Gwyn Prosser: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what plans he has to ensure that growth in pensions is linked to growth in the economy.

Ian McCartney: The basic state pension remains the foundation for income in retirement. Increases announced for last April and next in the basic state pension have given single pensioners £2.10 more than an earnings link would have given them and £3.35 more for couples. We have given a guarantee that the basic state pension will be increased by at least £100 a year for single pensioners and £160 for couples in 2003–04, and in future years by 2.5 per cent. or the increase in the September Retail Prices Index, whichever is the higher.
	We are also committed to increasing the Minimum Income Guarantee (MIG) in line with earnings. Around 2 million less-well-off pensioners benefit from this. The income guarantee element of Pension Credit will replace MIG from October 2003 and this will be uprated in line with earnings throughout this Parliament. Around half of all pensioner households will be entitled to it and will be better off because they will gain, year-on-year, a larger increase in their state support than they would receive from an earnings link in the basic state pension.
	By April 2002, as a result of this Government's policies compared with the 1997 system, an average pensioner household will be £840 a year better off and around 1.8 million of the poorest pensioner households will be over £1000 a year better off.

Doctors' Handwriting

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what delays were caused in the hearings of appeals of disability claims to the tribunal service owing to the illegibility of doctors' handwriting in (a) 1992 and (b) 1997; and what the most recent available figures are for each health authority in England.

Maria Eagle: The information is not available.

Accountancy Services

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total cost to his Department was for accountancy services in each of the last four years.

Nick Brown: The Department's information systems do not allow the cost of accountancy services to be isolated separately. These costs are contained within a wider Professional Services heading and could not be isolated without incurring disproportionate cost.

Fair Trade

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his answer of 19 November 2001, Official Report, column 145W, on Fair Trade goods, if he will review during Fair Trade Fortnight the amount of fairly traded goods used in his Department.

Nick Brown: The Department obtains the majority of fair trade goods it uses from outsourced services, for example catering. It is our policy to consider ethical factors throughout our supply chain and we will review the use of Fair Trade goods with our suppliers during Fair Trade Fortnight.

Lone Parents

Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list the research his Department has conducted on the impact of the New Deal for Lone Parents on the employment rate for lone parents; and if he will place copies of this research in the Library.

Nick Brown: XNDLP Evaluation: A Quantitative Survey of Lone Parents on Income Support" was published in November 2001 and is available in the Library. For earlier research reports I refer my right hon. Friend to the answer I gave him on 23 November 2001, Official Report, column 537W.

Employment Zone (South Tyneside)

Stephen Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the employment zone in South Tyneside in reducing unemployment.

Nick Brown: The Action Team for Jobs in South Tyneside is helping tackle joblessness in the area. The Team is performing well. In its first full year of operation, the Team worked with 688 disadvantaged jobless people, helping 333 (48 per cent.) of them into jobs.
	Source: Department for Work and Pensions Management Information.

Disability Employment Advisers

Steve Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list the number of Jobcentres for which each disability employment adviser is responsible, and the procedures that are in place for dealing with cover during times of (a) sickness and (b) agreed absence; and if he will make a statement.

Nick Brown: The Employment Service aims to provide a high quality service to disabled people and their employers. In order to deliver this service we have in place a network of around 650 specialist disability employment advisers.
	Information on which Jobcentres each disability employment adviser has responsibility for is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
	The procedure to cover both unplanned and agreed absences is normally that another member of disability service staff will carry out pre-arranged, priority work such as interviews with clients. If a disability service team member of staff is not available, procedures are in place to ensure that urgent advice can be sought from an experienced adviser where necessary.

Industrial Action (Jobcentre Plus)

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many days will have been lost to industrial action since September 2001 as a result of the action taken by members of the Public and Commercial Services Union.

Nick Brown: holding answer 5 February 2002
	Some 217,000 days have been lost to strike action by members of the Public and Commercial Services Union in the Department since September 2001 up to and including 31 January 2002.
	Three quarters of the combined staff of the Benefits Agency and the Employment Service remained at work during the second two days of national strike action on 28 and 29 January.

Industrial Action (Jobcentre Plus)

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many benefit claimants have had personal adviser consultations postponed as a result of industrial action undertaken by Jobcentre Plus staff.

Nick Brown: This information is not available.

Assaults (Benefits Staff)

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his Department's policy is for dealing with claimants who (a) verbally and (b) physically attack staff in Benefits Agency, Employment Service and Jobcentre Plus offices.

Nick Brown: Ministers and Senior Management have made clear that we will not tolerate threats, abuse, actual or attempted assaults on our staff in the Benefits Agency, the Employment Service and Jobcentre Plus. Our staff are public servants who strive to give a quality service.
	The overwhelming majority of people who use our offices behave well, but we are not prepared to allow a small minority of violent or abusive people to deflect us from achieving the outstanding service levels for which we are aiming.
	Our clear policy is not to tolerate abusive or violent behaviour. People who act in this way will be asked to leave our offices. We will not hesitate to involve the Police; to deny abusive and violent people future access to our offices; and, where appropriate, to prosecute.

Assaults (Benefits Staff)

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many physical assaults there have been in the Jobcentre Plus Pathfinder Clusters since their establishment in September 2001; how many assaults there have been in offices with screened areas; and if he will make a statement.

Nick Brown: holding answer 4 February 2002
	Benefits Agency staff receive training for the specific roles they undertake and will continue to do so in the organisations that succeed it. Jobcentre Plus and the Pension Service will come into being from April 2002.
	During the design and development of the Jobcentre Plus pathfinders, the safety of staff has been of paramount importance. All staff have received training for the specific roles they undertake and staff dealing with the public have been trained in preventing and calming difficult situations.

Assaults (Benefits Staff)

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will provide additional training for Benefits Agency staff to help them deal with individual threats.

Nick Brown: holding answer 4 February 2002
	Benefits Agency staff receive training for the specific roles they undertake and will continue to do so in the organisations that succeed it. Jobcentre Plus and the Pension Service will come into being from April 2002.
	During the design and development of the Jobcentre Plus pathfinders, the safety of staff has been of paramount importance. All staff have received training for the specific roles they undertake and staff dealing with the public have been trained in preventing and calming difficult situations.

New Deal

James Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps are taken to assess the number of entrants to the New Deal for Young People who are functionally (a) illiterate and (b) innumerate on (i) entering and (ii) leaving the Gateway Period of the New Deal; and how many such people are on the New Deal.

Nick Brown: New Deal personal advisers follow a clear screening and assessment process to ensure young people requiring help with basic skills, such as literacy and numeracy, are offered assistance to meet their needs.
	As part of the initial interview with people entering the New Deal, personal advisors ask questions designed to establish whether the young person has any potential basic skills needs. If a possible need is identified, the young person is referred for independent assessment through a Basic Skills Agency test. Young people are then offered basic skills help in line with the assessment outcome. Following the basic skills provision, personal advisers keep track of the young person's improvements and discuss with them the most appropriate method of meeting any further needs.
	Information on those requiring help with basic skills has been collected since April 2001. It does not differentiate between literacy and numeracy. Between April and November 2001, 4,410 young people attended provision designed to address their basic skills needs. 2,854 of these were within the New Deal gateway. Information on the outcomes of basic skills provision is not available.

New Deal

Ivan Henderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in the Harwich constituency are in the New Deal programme; and how many were placed in employment following their participation in the scheme.

Nick Brown: Information at constituency level is not available for the New Deal for Disabled People and the New Deal for Partners. The available information is in the table:
	
		
			 New Deal Participating as at end November 2001 Placed into employment 
		
		
			 Young People 55 586 
			 25 plus 55 68 
			 Lone Parents 177 201 
			 50 plus* 71 143 
		
	
	* Figures are to the end of December 2001.
	Source:
	New Deal Evaluation Database.

Special Advisers

Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average time is that the Head of his Department has recommended since May 1997 between a special adviser leaving his Department and taking up outside employment; and if he will make a statement.

Nick Brown: I refer the hon. Member to the answer that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister gave to him on 21 January 2002, Official Report, column 594W.

Departmental Expenditure

Elfyn Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list his Department's total expenditure by month in each financial year since 1997-98.

Nick Brown: Monthly figures for all Departments would be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, the Treasury has published full, financial outturns for the years 1997-98 to 1999-2000 in Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses (Cm 5101). Provisional financial year outturns for 2000-01 have been published in Public Expenditure 2000-01 Provisional Outturn (Cm5243).

Staff Numbers

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people were employed in his Department in each of the last four years.

Nick Brown: I refer to the reply given by the Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office on 18 December 2001, Official Report, column 256W.

IT Costs

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the costs of RFR4 Modernising Welfare Delivery are in respect of information technology, computerisation and on-line technology; and how much of these costs are outsourced.

Nick Brown: The costs contained in RFR4 Modernising Welfare Delivery are all considered to be for information technology computerisation and on-line technology; in as much they cover all modernisation projects funded from the welfare modernisation fund. The costs contained in RFR4 for the financial year 2001–02 are:
	
		
			  £ million 
		
		
			 Running Costs 467 
			 Capital 88 
			  
			 Total 555 
		
	
	The portion of these costs that has been outsourced (based on current project forecasts of costs of external suppliers for this financial year), are:
	
		
			  £ million 
		
		
			 Running Costs 252 
			 Capital 88 
			  
			 Total 340

Unemployment (St. Helens, South)

Shaun Woodward: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what percentage of the unemployed in St. Helens, South have been unemployed for a year or more (a) this year, (b) in 1997 and (c) in 1992.

Ruth Kelly: I have been asked to reply.
	The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician. I have asked him to reply.
	Letter from Len Cook to Mr. Shaun Woodward, dated 28 February 2002
	As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your parliamentary question asking for the percentage of the unemployed in St. Helens South who have been unemployed for a year or more (a) this year, (b) in 1997 and (c) in 1992.
	The Office for National Statistics (ONS) compiles statistics for unemployment from surveys following the international standard International Labour Organisation definition. However, for the St. Helens South parliamentary constituency the survey sample size is too small to provide estimates.
	ONS also compiles statistics of claimants of unemployment-related benefits. The claimant count consists of all people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance or National Insurance credits at Employment Service local offices. They must declare that they are out of work, capable of, available for and actively seeking work during the week in which the claim is made.
	The table below shows numbers of claimants with duration over one year or more calculated as a percentage of the total number of claimants in the St. Helens South parliamentary constituency for each January 1992, 1997 and 2002.
	
		St. Helens South parliamentary constituency: Claimants for over one year (computerised claims only*)
		
			  Level Per cent. 
		
		
			 January 1992 1,704 34.5 
			 January 1997 1,300 37.9 
			 January 2002 454 20.2 
		
	
	* Computerised claims include around 99 per cent. of all claims.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Rail Infrastructure Company

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will make a statement on the involvement her Department has had in the proposed structure of the successor company to Railtrack.

Patricia Hewitt: My Department has had no involvement in this issue.

Energy (Environmental Guidelines)

Jonathan Sayeed: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when her Department intends to issue the statutory social and environmental guidelines to the Gas and Electricity Markets Authority.

Brian Wilson: I refer the hon. Member to answer given on 26 February 2001, Official Report, column 1127w.

Universal Bank

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if funds will be made available to self-employed sub-postmasters and mistresses to cover the costs of training staff in the use of the Universal Bank.

Douglas Alexander: The training of self-employed sub-postmasters in the use and delivery of Universal Banking Services is a commercial and operational matter for Post Office Limited.

Universal Bank

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate she has made of the number of sub-post offices in which the Universal Bank will operate.

Douglas Alexander: The delivery of Universal Banking services is a commercial and operational matter for Post Office Limited. My understanding is that Universal Banking Services will be available at all post offices.

Universal Bank

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate she has made of the sums allocated by each of the major clearing banks for investment in the Universal Bank.

Douglas Alexander: The major high street banks and the Nationwide Building Society have agreed to contribute £180 million to the costs of the Post Office Card Account. They have also agreed that they will make their own basic bank accounts accessible through post offices. How much each institution is allocating to the latter is a commercial matter for each organisation.

Universal Bank

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what charges will be operated by the Universal Bank for accounts that go into overdraft.

Douglas Alexander: Universal Banking Services have two elements. Under the first element the banks will make their basic bank accounts accessible at post offices. Implementation of that agreement is now a commercial matter between Post Office Limited and the banks. The detailed features of these accounts are not part of the agreement on Universal Banking Services. However, the Government have announced their intention to establish a benchmark CAT standard––covering charges, access and terms––for a basic bank account, and are still in discussion with the banks about these. The second element of Universal Banking Services is the Post Office Card Account. This account will allow benefits claimants to access their benefits in cash at post offices using a Post Office based card instead of an order book or giro. It will not be possible for the account to be overdrawn.

Universal Bank

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate she has made of the costs of training staff in sub-post offices in the use of the Universal Bank, and what sums are allocated in her Department's budget for training sub-post office staff in the use of the Universal Bank.

Douglas Alexander: The staff training involved in the delivery of Universal Banking Services through post offices is a commercial matter for the Post Office Limited.

Postal Services (Blind People)

Michael Fabricant: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if the Government will ensure that postal service for the registered blind will remain free of charge; and if she will make a statement.

Douglas Alexander: Consignia plc currently provides certain postal services free to blind and partially sighted people under the Articles for the Blind service. This service permits blind and partially sighted people to send a letter or parcel of any weight up to 7 kilograms free of charge to any place in the world within the terms and conditions of the service.
	In order to ensure that this service is not eroded at any time in the future, on 14 March 2001, the then Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, issued to the postal regulator the Postal Services Commission (Postcomm) a Directive under Section 41 of the Postal Services Act 2000 under which Postcomm was instructed to include in the licence of all universal postal service providers a condition requiring them to provide certain services free of charge to the blind and partially sighted. In accordance with section 41 (2) of the Act, the requirement would not come into force before a further direction was made by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. To date this Department has not needed to issue such a further direction.
	In addition, Postcomm requires Consignia plc, in the licence, to publish and submit a statement of the arrangements it has established or intends to establish to ensure that users of postal services who have significant difficulty in reaching the post office letter boxes and access points provided because they are, amongst other things, blind or partially sighted are able to post letters and postal packets regularly and as far as possible without significant cost to those users attributable to their difficulties. Such a statement was submitted to Postcomm and Postwatch on 3 August 2001 and is available on the Royal Mail's website.
	Copies of the Direction, the Consignia licence and Consignia's statement on Access and Social Obligations have been placed in the Libraries of the House.

Postal Services (Blind People)

Michael Fabricant: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will require (a) Consignia and (b) other future postal operators to provide a free mail service for the blind.

Douglas Alexander: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given above to PQ No. 36111.

Post Offices

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many post offices there were in (a) the constituency of the Ribble Valley and Fulwood, (b) Lancashire, (c) the North West of England, (d) Wales and (e) the United Kingdom, in each year since 1997.

Douglas Alexander: Post Office Limited started to analyse post offices numbers by Government Office region in England in March 2001 when total outlets in the North West numbered 1,853. I understand from Post Office Limited that data on post office network are not held on a parliamentary constituency or county basis.
	I am informed by Post Office Limited that data by country are not available before 1998. The numbers of post offices operating in Wales in the last three financial years are as follows:
	
		Wales
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 End March 1998 1,513 
			 End March 1999 1,501 
			 End March 2000 1,470 
			 End March 2001 1,402 
		
	
	I am also informed by Post Office Limited that an on-going revision of data has affected individual country totals.
	In the UK, the numbers of post offices operating since 1997 are as follows:
	
		
			  Number 
		
		
			 End March 1997 19,251 
			 End March 1998 19,008 
			 End March 1999 18,775 
			 End March 2000 18,393 
			 End March 2001 17,846

Postal Services Commission

Sydney Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the annual budget was of the Postal Services Commission and its predecessor body for the financial years (a) 1999-2000 and (b) 2000-01; what the agreed budget is for 2001-02; and what the estimated budget is for 2002-03.

Douglas Alexander: holding answer 14 February 2002
	The Postal Services Commission was initially created within DTI by administrative action in January 2000 and became an independent non-Ministerial Government Department on the coming into force of the Postal Services Act on 6 November 2000.
	No specific budget was fixed for financial year 1999-2000 with the initial staff and administrative costs incurred from January 2000 being covered by DTI. The agreed budgets for the following years are as follows:
	2000-01: £3.701 million
	2001-02: £6.101 million
	2002-03 estimated budget: £6.001 million

National Manufacturing Summit

Alan Beith: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will list the manufacturers who attended the December National Manufacturing Summit; how many SME manufacturers were invited; and which manufacturers from the North East were invited to attend.

Patricia Hewitt: The list of manufacturers who attended the Manufacturing Summit is as follows:
	BAE Systems
	Alstom UK
	LandRover
	Perkins Engines
	Nissan UK
	Benteler Automotive UK
	Signet Group plc
	A number of manufacturers were invited with the help of the Government Offices and the devolved Administrations with the intention of achieving a good spread of manufacturing interests. Nissan UK attended from the North East region.

Arthur Andersen

Nigel Waterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to her answer of 11 February 2002, Official Report, column 60W, if she will list (a) those attending and (b) the subjects discussed at the business dinner with Arthur Andersen on 22 January.

Patricia Hewitt: The dinner was attended by a number of senior business people and representatives from Arthur Anderson. A wide range of issues were discussed. It is not normal practice to release details of meetings or discussions with private individuals or companies.

Arthur Andersen

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many contracts Arthur Andersen received from HM Government in each year since 1987; and what the aggregate value of those contracts was (a) before and (b) since 1997.

Patricia Hewitt: This information is not held centrally.
	For my own Department, since May 1997 seven contracts with an aggregate value of £4.9 million have been awarded. Information for the period 1987-97 cannot be accessed except at disproportionate cost.

Arthur Andersen

Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to her answer of 11 February 2002, to the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Waterson), Official Report, column 60W, on Arthur Andersen, if she will place interim reports from the contracts in the Library; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: The position on publication of reports on the ongoing contracts with Arthur Andersen referred to in my answer of 11 February is as follows:
	Framework arrangement for the Work-life Balance Challenge Fund projects: as the projects involve information provided on a confidential basis by companies there will be no published report.
	Study of UK competitive position: the project involves researching and updating manuals for investment officers in the UK and abroad and regional partners. As these documents are for internal training use only there will be no published report.
	Research and updating of information sheets: this information is available on the Invest UK website www.invest.uk.com.

Unlicensed Radio Stations

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry 
	(1)  how many prosecutions there were of unlicensed radio stations in each of the last available five years;
	(2)  how many prosecutions of unlicensed radio stations in the Greater London area there were in each of the last available five years; .
	(3)  how many complaints the relevant department received in each of the last five years about the broadcast of unlicensed radio stations;
	(4)  if she will list the average fine imposed on unlicensed radio stations for unauthorised broadcasting in each of the last five years.

Douglas Alexander: The number of convictions secured by the Radiocommunications Agency against pesons for unlicensed broadcasting in the last five years is as follows:
	
		
			 Year Number 
		
		
			 1997 41 
			 1998 53 
			 1999 47 
			 2000 41 
			 2001 20 
		
	
	Unlicensed radio stations go to great lengths to avoid detection of studio sites but the Agency also puts consideration effort into the removal of transmitters (1,438 raids in 2001).

Postal Services

Annabelle Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, pursuant to her answer of 6 February 2002, Official Report, column 968W, on Consignia, what proportion of the £2 million fund to support volunteer and community initiatives to maintain or reopen post office facilities in rural areas has been spent to date; of that sum, what proportion has been spent in Scotland; and what proportion of the £480 million invested by the UK Government in the Horizon programme to automate the post office network has been spent in Scotland.

Douglas Alexander: I refer to the reply to the hon. Member for North Norfolk (Norman Lamb) on 11 February 2002, Official Report, column 67W. Six applications for support under the £2 million rural fund have been received from initiatives in Scotland; Post Office Limited are currently evaluating them.
	To date POL have despatched 139 application forms of which 29 have been completed and returned. Of those 29, seven applications have been agreed and three have not met the criteria for the scheme, the remainder are at various states of examination.
	The Horizon programme was a national project and information is available only on the UK wide basis.

Postal Services

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the latest posting time was to achieve next-day delivery of post to the Isle of Wight from (a) Belfast, (b) Cardiff, (c) Edinburgh, (d) Liverpool, (e) Manchester, (f) Newcastle, (g) Leeds, (h) London South-Western District and (i) Birmingham in (i) 2001, (ii) 1991 and (iii) 1981.

Douglas Alexander: holding answer 26 February 2002
	I understand from Consignia that to achieve next day delivery from major city centre boxes across the UK to the Isle of Wight, the last posting times were generally as follows:
	1981: 17.30
	1991: 17.30
	2001: 19.30

Postal Services

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the latest posting time was to achieve next-day delivery of post from the Isle of Wight to (a) Belfast, (b) Cardiff, (c) Edinburgh, (d) Liverpool, (e) Manchester, (f) Newcastle, (g) Leeds, (h) London South-Western District and (i) Birmingham in (i) 2001, (ii) 1991 and (iii) 1981.

Douglas Alexander: holding answer 26 February 2002
	I understand from Consignia that the latest posting times to achieve next day delivery from the Isle of Wight to major city centres across the UK were as follows:
	Newport 18.45 at box in Newport town
	Ryde 18.30 at box in Union Street
	Sandown 18.00 at box outside Sorting Office
	Freshwater 17.30 at box outside office
	Ventnor 17.30 at box outside office
	The latest posting times from other boxes vary according to location. In 1981 and 1991, the last collection from the Isle of Wight was 17.30.

Postal Services

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what proportion of addresses in (a) England, (b) Scotland, (c) Wales, (d) Northern Ireland and (e) the United Kingdom receive a second daily delivery of mail.

Douglas Alexander: holding answer 27 February 2002
	I understand from Consignia that it currently categorises delivery points as either XTown" which receive a second delivery where mail is available or XRural" which receive a single delivery.
	The proportion of addresses covered by a second daily delivery of mail is as follows:
	
		
			  Per cent 
		
		
			 England 88.9 
			 Scotland 85.2 
			 Wales 81.9 
			 Northern Ireland 72.2 
			 United Kingdom 87.7 
		
	
	On a UK wide basis, on average 95 per cent. of mail by volume is delivered on first delivery.

Postal Services

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what proportion of the population of (a) England, (b) Scotland, (c) Wales, (d) Northern Ireland and (e) the United Kingdom live more than (i) one mile, (ii) two miles and (iii) five miles from a postbox.

Douglas Alexander: I understand from Consignia that of the 27 million UK delivery addresses, 0.9 per cent. are more than one mile from a post box and 0.001 per cent. are more than five miles from a post box or posting facility.
	Information is availably only on a UK basis at distances of one and five miles.

Export Credits Guarantee Department

Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate she has made of the annual revenues that would be generated if the Export Credits Guarantee Department were required to generate a return to the Government on capital of six per cent. in real terms; and if she will make a statement.

Patricia Hewitt: I announced to the House on 7th February 2002 that the original target date for the establishment of an ECGD Trading Fund was no longer appropriate. Pending the further announcement which I have undertaken to make in due course it would not be appropriate for me to provide such an estimate.

LNM Holdings

Adam Price: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what meetings have taken place since 1997 between ministers and officials of her Department and Mr. Lakshmi Mittal and executives of the LNM Group; on what dates the meetings occurred; and who attended from her Department.

Patricia Hewitt: Ministers and civil servants meet many people as part of the process of policy development and analysis. All such contacts are conducted in accordance with the 'Ministerial Code', the 'Civil Service Code' and 'Guidance for Civil Servants: Contacts with Lobbyists'. Some of these discussions take place on a confidential basis, and in order to preserve confidentiality, it is not the normal practice of Governments to release specific details of specific meetings with private individuals or companies.

LNM Holdings

Adam Price: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when her Department was informed of the attempt by the LNM Group to acquire Sidex.

Patricia Hewitt: In accordance with previous Administration it is not our practice to disclose internal advice to Ministers which is exempt under exemption 2 of the Code of Practice on access to Government information.

LNM Holdings

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will list the occasions on which meetings have taken place between ministers or officials and representatives of LNM Holdings in the last five years.

Patricia Hewitt: Ministers and civil servants meet many people as part of the process of policy development and analysis. All such contacts are conducted in accordance with the 'Ministerial Code', the 'Civil Service Code' and 'Guidance for Civil Servants: Contacts with Lobbyists'. Some of these discussions take place on a confidential basis, and in order to preserve confidentiality, it is not the normal practice of Governments to release specific details of specific meetings with private individuals or companies.

LNM Holdings

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations were made by her Department to the European Commission regarding the takeover of Irish Steel by LNM Holdings.

Patricia Hewitt: The takeover of Irish Steel by LNM Holdings was dealt with under a previous administration.

LNM Holdings

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when her Department was informed of the support given by LNM Holdings for the imposition of US tariffs against overseas steel imports.

Patricia Hewitt: My Department was not directly informed, but became aware through the media, of this support.

LNM Holdings

John Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations her Department has received against the takeover of Sidex Steel by LNM Holdings.

Patricia Hewitt: I receive representations from many groups eager to press their case.

London Congestion Charge

Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment she has made of the impact the proposed London congestion charge will have on Consignia's operations in the charging zone.

Douglas Alexander: The proposed central London congestion charging scheme is a matter for the Mayor of London. This Department has not made an assessment of the impact the proposed charge would have on Consignia plc.

Regional Development Agencies

Ian Liddell-Grainger: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will increase the number of places for business people on RDA boards.

Alan Johnson: The RDAs are business-led organisations and all the RDA Chairs have strong business backgrounds. I announced the new appointments to the Regional Development Agency boards on 7 December 2001. Board members with current business experience now make up 50 per cent. of boards overall. This is a ten per cent. increase from the last round of appointments. Some RDA boards have even higher percentages of current business representation, including the East of England Development Agency and the South West Regional Development Agency with 57 per cent.
	Trade unions, local government, voluntary organisations and other bodies will also continue to be represented on RDA boards, with the majority of boards now at their statutory maximum of 15 members.

Regional Development Agencies

Ian Liddell-Grainger: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will increase regional development agency support for national parks.

Alan Johnson: From 1 April, funding for Regional Development Agencies will be through new single programme budget arrangements. RDAs will be able to decide on their priorities for spending according to their regional economic strategies. Funding for RDAs will increase significantly in 2002–03 over 2001–02, from £1.2 billion to £1.5 billion, but it is for individual RDA to decide on the basis of their dialogue with local stakeholders how these resources should be used.

Business Contacts

Tim Collins: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations she has made to foreign Governments on behalf of individual companies since 7 June 2001; and which they were.

Patricia Hewitt: I regularly make representations to foreign Governments on behalf of British business when it is in the UK's interest to do so. As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made clear in his answer on 14 February 2002, Official Report, column 611W, Ministers in successive Governments have worked for British interest abroad and as Secretary of State for Trade and Industry I regard this as an important part of my job.

Government Chemist

Brian White: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she has received the 2001 Review of the Government Chemist.

Patricia Hewitt: I have just received the fifth Annual Review of the Government Chemist and copies will be placed in the Libraries of the House.

External Consultants

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry which non-accounting and non-information technology external organisations have won new contracts with (a) her Department and (b) executive agencies in each of the past five years.

Patricia Hewitt: On the basis that every purchase order constitutes a contract, Companies House is unable to respond with the requested information on the grounds of disproportionate cost.

Departmental Expenditure Limits

Phil Sawford: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what plans there are to change the departmental expenditure limit and administration cost limits for her Department and the Office of Fair Trading.

Patricia Hewitt: A technical revision has been made to the Department of Trade and Industry DEL, which has no impact on either the total DEL or the Administration Costs limit.
	Within the DEL change, the impact on resources and capital is as set out in the following table.
	
		
			  Resources (£000) Capital (£000)  
			 Change New DEL Of which: Voted Non-voted Change New DEL Of which: Voted Non-voted 
		
		
			 7,043 4,029,188 895,145 3,134,043 -7,043 806,285 -148,330 954,615 
		
	
	The change in the resource and capital DEL arises from a revision of the classification as between resource and capital of an agreed increase in DEL for the Science research councils of £43,270,000 which was included in the Winter Supplementary.
	Subject to Parliamentary approval of the necessary Supplementary Estimate the Office of Fair Trading DEL will be increased by £3,000,000 from £40,536,000 to £43,536,000 and the Administration Costs limit will be increased by £3,000,000 from £40,536,000 to £43,536,000.
	Within the DEL change, the impact on resources and capital is as set out in the following table:
	
		
			 Resources (£000) Capital (£000) 
			 Change New DEL Of which: Voted Non-voted Change New DEL Of which: Voted Non-voted 
		
		
			 3,000 41,308 39,008 2,300 0 2,228 2,228 0 
		
	
	The change in the resource element of the DEL arises from the following:
	(i) to provide additional resources of £700,000 in Administration to enable the Office of Fair Trading to meet the costs of all liability to third parties for litigation and redress;
	(ii) to provide additional resources of £1,112,000 in Administration in relation to the recharge of rental income for the Office of Fair Trading Minor Occupiers. This is offset by a corresponding increase in Appropriations in Aid;
	(iii) utilise the provision of £2,300,000 in meeting the costs of liability to third parties for litigation and redress.
	The increase will be charged to the DEL Reserve and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.

Shipbuilders

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what plans her Department has for the future of British Shipbuilders.

Brian Wilson: British Shipbuilders still exists, under Statute, as a Nationalised Industry, although it is some years since it built ships or manufactured equipment. The only significant remaining liability of the Corporation is Employer Liability. It is intended that an official of the Department of Trade and Industry will be appointed Chairman as from 4 March, following expiry of the tenure of the current Chairman on 3 March.

Regional Assistance

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many of the regional assistance grants to industry expressed (a) as a percentage and (b) in cash terms was given to the parliamentary constituency of South East Cornwall in each year since 1992; what the most recent available 12 month figures are; and if she will make a statement.

Alan Johnson: Regional Selective Assistance (RSA) is a demand-led capital investment grant linked to the creation or safeguarding of jobs in designated areas of need (the Assisted Areas). The number of RSA grant offers this Department made to companies in the South East Cornwall parliamentary constituency (a) as a percentage of the total number of offers made in England and (b) in cash terms for each of the years from 1992 to 2001, is set out in the table.
	Since 1 January 2000, the RSA scheme has been restricted to projects involving capital investment of £500,000 or more. In April 2000 this Department introduced a new, simplified scheme, the Enterprise Grants Scheme (EGS), to help small firms undertake fixed capital investment projects below the £500,000 threshold for RSA. One EGS offer of £75,000 was made, in the year 2001, to a company in South East Cornwall parliamentary constituency. A total of 666 EGS offers were made in England in the year 2001 and 479 offers were made in the year 2000.
	
		Offers of Regional Selective Assistance Grant in South East Cornwall parliamentary constituency
		
			 Year Number of offers in South East Cornwall parliamentary constituency Number of offers in South East Cornwall parliamentary constituency as per cent of total offers in England (per cent rounded to 1 decimal place) Total value of offers in South East Cornwall parliamentary constituency in cash (£ millions) 
		
		
			 2001 1 0.5 0.160 
			 2000 1 0.5 0.165 
			 1999 2 0.2 0.185 
			 1998 3 0.3 1.125 
			 1997 2 0.2 0.116 
			 1996 3 0.2 0.175 
			 1995 6 0.4 0.465 
			 1994 5 0.4 0.929 
			 1993 10 1.0 0.271 
			 1992 4 0.5 0.056

Management Board

Denzil Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, if she will list the names and present occupations of the non-executive members of her Department's Management Board.

Patricia Hewitt: There is one independent member on the Department Board. Her name if Mair Barnes and she is a non-executive director on a number of boards.

SCOTLAND

Disease Control

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland 
	(1)  what representations she has made to the Department of Health in respect of the paper, Getting Ahead of the Curve-A Strategy for Combating Infectious Diseases;
	(2)  what discussions she has had with the Department of Health on the impact on Scotland of its proposals to disband the National Radiological Protection Board.

George Foulkes: Discussions are taking place between the Department of Health and the Scottish Executive about how the proposals will affect Scotland. These discussions include consideration of how the arrangements for the functions currently exercised in Scotland by the National Radiological Protection Board might be affected by the proposed creation of the National Infection Control and Health Protection Agency.

National Lottery

Russell Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland which Scottish areas will benefit from the Fair Share National Lottery Initiative.

George Foulkes: This initiative is designed to ensure that disadvantaged areas which have received lower levels up until now of lottery funding will receive a fair share of future funding. Under the initiative, two of the National Lottery distributing bodies, the New Opportunities Fund and the Community Fund, will target £169 million of resources. Sixty-two disadvantaged areas across Great Britain will benefit. In Scotland, six Scottish local authority areas will be targeted, making available a total of £14.95 million over the next three years.
	The Scottish local authority areas included in Fair Share are: City of Glasgow, City of Dundee, North Lanarkshire, South Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire and South Ayrshire. The six areas were selected by the lottery distributors on the basis of disadvantage combined with low levels of lottery funding. The distributors referred to the Scottish Area Deprivation Index and recent analysis for the Better Neighbourhood Services Fund initiative.
	In considering lottery awards in the Fair Share areas, NOF and the Community Fund will work with a range of partners engaged in community regeneration and development, including Social Inclusion Partnerships, local authorities and Councils for Voluntary Service.
	My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport is making an announcement today about the areas in England that will benefit from Fair Share. The areas in Wales and Northern Ireland will be announced in due course.

Rail Access (Airports)

Peter Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when she expects to publish the joint study with the Strategic Rail Authority and the Scottish Executive into the potential improvements in rail access to Scottish airports.

Helen Liddell: The Scottish Executive, in association with other parties, have commissioned consultants to undertake a detailed economic and engineering study of rail links to Glasgow and Edinburgh Airports. I understand that the study is expected to be concluded by the Autumn. Publication of the report will be a matter for the Scottish Executive.

Nuclear Energy

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what responsibility she has for the development of nuclear energy policy in Scotland.

Helen Liddell: I am responsible for ensuring that the Scottish interest in reserved matters, including those relating to energy policy, receives proper consideration.

Tourism

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when she last met representatives of (a) the British Tourist Board and (b) VisitScotland.

Helen Liddell: I have regular contact with the British Tourist Authority and with VisitScotland to ensure that Scotland is promoted as a world class tourist destination.

Tourism

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what responsibilities she has for the promotion of Scottish tourism by (a) Scottish and (b) United Kingdom-wide Government bodies.

Helen Liddell: As Secretary of State for Scotland I continue to promote Scottish interests in the UK and overseas. In implementing my Friends of Scotland initiative, my Department works in consultation with VisitScotland and the British Tourist Authority.

ADVOCATE-GENERAL

Ministerial Functions

Annabelle Ewing: To ask the Advocate-General which provisions of the Scotland Act 1998 she has relied upon with respect to the development of the role of Advocate-General that she has embarked upon.

Lynda Clark: The Scotland Act deals only with my statutory functions but the provisions which to date have been most relevant are (a) section 33, which enables the Advocate-General, Lord Advocate or Attorney-General to refer the question of whether a Bill or any provision of a Bill would be within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for decision. In my answer of 25 January 2002, Official Report, column 1127W on legislation I explained my approach to Scottish Parliament Bills under section 33 and (b) paragraph 6 of Schedule 6, which provides that where intimation of a devolution issue is given to the Advocate-General or Lord Advocate under paragraph 5 the Advocate-General or Lord Advocate may take part as a party to the proceedings, so far as they relate to a devolution issue. In my answer of 25 January, I explained my approach to intervention in devolution issue cases.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Human Rights Commission

Paul Farrelly: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he will decide whether to reappoint Christine Bell to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

Des Browne: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has this week signed the warrant to reappoint Professor Bell for a further two years as a member of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. The reappointment is effective from 1 March 2002.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Pakistan

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what his Department's involvement has been regarding the arrest in Pakistan of Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh; and if he will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office had no involvement in the arrest of Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh. However, we are continuing to monitor the situation.

Sudan

David Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment he has made of the prospects for peace in Sudan.

Denis MacShane: We believe that 2002 offers a real window of opportunity for peace in Sudan and that the UK has a major role to play in ensuring that this opportunity is seized. On 12 February the Foreign Secretary announced the appointment of Alan Goulty as the new UK Special Representative for Sudan. Mr. Goulty will be supported by a dedicated Sudan Unit, which will be staffed by officers from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for International Development. In co-ordination with partners interested in bringing peace to Sudan, Mr. Goulty will be engaging with all parties to the conflict in an effort to promote the case for peace.

Sudan

Jenny Tonge: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with the US Administration regarding their decision to suspend peace negotiations with the Government of Sudan.

Denis MacShane: We are working closely with the US Administration over Sudan, and have encouraged them to continue to engage with the Sudanese Government. What matters most is an end to suffering caused by the civil war. The only way to achieve this is through strong pressure from the international community on all parties to the conflict.

Sudan

Jenny Tonge: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Government of Sudan regarding attacks on a food aid distribution site in the Western Upper Nile region of Southern Sudan.

Denis MacShane: We have expressed concern at a high level of the Sudanese Government, both in Khartoum and London, about reports that a Sudanese Government helicopter gunship fired on civilians. We condemn all such attacks.
	This attack is particularly distressing at a time when hopes for peace in Sudan have been growing. We shall intensify our efforts to press all parties to the conflict on the need for swift negotiated settlement in order to end the suffering caused by so many years of civil war.

Arab Summit (Lebanon)

Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Israeli Government to allow Yasser Arafat to leave Ramallah to attend the Arab summit in Lebanon between 25 and 26 March.

Ben Bradshaw: I expressed my serious concern about President Arafat's continued detention in Ramallah to Israeli leaders during my visit to Israel between 14 and 17 January. We have repeatedly called on the Israeli Government to end its policy of restricting Palestinians' freedom of movement. The closures contribute to a feeling of hopelessness among Palestinians, and make a comprehensive settlement more difficult to achieve.
	In this context, we hope that there can be early progress so that efforts to achieve a positive outcome from the Arab League Summit in Beirut on 27 March are not distracted by doubt over President Arafat's attendance. Restoration of a positive momentum to the peace process is in the interests of both parties.

NRZ Pensions

Owen Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if it is his policy to meet the assurances given by the British Government at the Lancaster House agreement in 1979 to NRZ employees to safeguard their pensions; and if he will compensate the NRZ employees for the failure of the Zimbabwe Government to fulfil promises made in the Lancaster House agreement.

Denis MacShane: The 1979 Lancaster House Agreement stipulated that the Zimbabwe Constitution should contain provisions entitling public servants to state pensions, and that pension benefits should continue to be paid to former public employees no longer resident in Zimbabwe. The Agreement contained no such guarantee for employees of parastatal organisations, such as the National Railways of Zimbabwe (NRZ). Nor did the Agreement contain any undertaking by the British Government to assume responsibility for the payment of pensions to those eligible, should the Zimbabwean authorities fail to maintain payments. Despite this, the British High Commission in Harare regularly reminds the Zimbabwean authorities of their obligations to pensioners under the terms of the Lancaster House Agreement.

Middle East

Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to Chairman Arafat to encourage a halt in violence by the Fatah faction and Hezbollah.

Ben Bradshaw: We continue to urge President Arafat to exert every effort to constrain the violence and bring those responsible for violent acts to justice. The Foreign Secretary most recently raised this with President Arafat when he called on him on 13 February.

Empty Property

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the total area in square feet of all empty properties owned by (a) his Department, (b) his agencies and (c) other public bodies for which he has had responsibility was in each year since May 1997.

Denis MacShane: It is not possible to answer this question without incurring disproportionate cost.

Refurbishment

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 17 January 2002, Official Report, column 415W, what the cost of refurbishing each Ministerial private office was in each year since May 1997.

Denis MacShane: The total cost of refurbishment works carried out to Ministerial offices within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is £47,795.32 since May 1997.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Police Funding

Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the funding available per 1,000 population for each police authority area in order of spending.

John Denham: The amount of grant funding available per 1,000 of population for each police authority area in 2001/02 and provisional grant funding for 2002/03 are given in the table in order of spending. Grant allocation includes Home Office police grant, revenue support grant (from the Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DTLR)), national non-domestic rates, Crime Fighting Fund allocations and, where applicable, rural policing fund grants.
	Resident population is one of a number of indicators used in the calculation of the police funding formula. Details of the indicators and their relative value in determining the allocation for individual forces are set out in the Police Grant Report (England and Wales) 2001/02 and the provisional Police Grant Report (England and Wales) 2002/03, a copy of each has been placed in the Library.
	
		
			 Police Authority Funding per 1,000 population 2001–02 (£k) 
		
		
			 Merseyside 162.9 
			 Northumbria 143.1 
			 Cleveland 141.3 
			 West Midlands 139.6 
			 Greater Manchester 139.4 
			 West Yorkshire 128.8 
			 Durham 127.1 
			 South Yorkshire 125.1 
			 South Wales 122.5 
			 Humberside 120.7 
			 Lancashire 117.0 
			 Gwent 116.7 
			 Cumbria 115.0 
			 Nottinghamshire 114.2 
			 Kent 107.9 
			 North Wales 106.9 
			 Dyfed-Powys 102.5 
			 Bedfordshire 101.3 
			 Avon and Somerset 100.6 
			 Leicestershire 100.5 
			 Devon and Cornwall 100.2 
			 Cheshire 99.7 
			 Gloucestershire 98.9 
			 Hampshire 98.5 
			 Norfolk 97.0 
			 Sussex 96.9 
			 Staffordshire 96.6 
			 Derbyshire 96.3 
			 Northamptonshire 96.0 
			 Thames Valley 93.9 
			 Wiltshire 93.8 
			 Cambridgeshire 93.8 
			 Suffolk 92.7 
			 Lincolnshire 92.5 
			 Hertfordshire 92.3 
			 Warwickshire 92.2 
			 Essex 92.1 
			 North Yorkshire 91.8 
			 West Mercia 90.1 
			 Dorset 85.8 
			 Surrey 77.0 
		
	
	
		
			 Police Authority Funding per 1,000 population 2002–03 (£k) 
		
		
			 Merseyside 168.3 
			 Northumbria 147.7 
			 Cleveland 147.0 
			 Greater Manchester 145.8 
			 West Midlands 144.6 
			 West Yorkshire 133.4 
			 Durham 132.0 
			 South Yorkshire 129.2 
			 South Wales 128.6 
			 Humberside 124.3 
			 Lancashire 121.9 
			 Gwent 121.9 
			 Cumbria 119.2 
			 Nottinghamshire 117.9 
			 Kent 112.1 
			 North Wales 111.0 
			 Dyfed-Powys 107.2 
			 Bedfordshire 106.2 
			 Devon and Cornwall 105.3 
			 Leicestershire 105.0 
			 Cheshire 104.2 
			 Hampshire 103.8 
			 Gloucestershire 103.3 
			 Norfolk 102.3 
			 Derbyshire 101.6 
			 Sussex 101.4 
			 Staffordshire 100.1 
			 Northamptonshire 99.7 
			 Thames Valley 98.5 
			 Wiltshire 97.4 
			 Cambridgeshire 97.3 
			 Hertfordshire 97.0 
			 Suffolk 96.5 
			 Essex 96.5 
			 Lincolnshire 96.2 
			 NorthYorkshire 95.9 
			 Warwickshire 95.4 
			 West Mercia 93.7 
			 Dorset 89.5 
			 Surrey 79.6 
		
	
	Funding for the Metropolitan and City police is included in provision for the Greater London Authority (GLA) and Corporation of the City of London respectively; both of which include funding for functions other than police. The principal police grant is given in the Provisional Police Grant Report.
	The population data are the resident population figures used in the police funding settlement for each year.

Human Rights Legislation

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what monitoring has been done to ascertain the effect of human rights legislation on the efficiency of police investigations into criminal activity; and if he will make a statement.

John Denham: The Home Office has neither commissioned nor undertaken any such monitoring.

Crime Detection

Huw Edwards: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the detection rate was for crimes in each police force in England and Wales in the last year for which figures are available.

John Denham: The latest available information on detection rates for total crime in police force areas, for the year ended March 2001, has been published in table 2.10 of The Stationery Office publication XCriminal Statistics England and Wales 2000", and is given below.
	
		Overall detection rate for recorded crime by police force area -- England and Wales 2000–01
		
			 Police force area Overall Detection Rate 
		
		
			 Avon and Somerset 22 
			 Bedfordshire 27 
			 Cambridgeshire 24 
			 Cheshire 30 
			 Cleveland 21 
			 Cumbria 34 
			 Derbyshire 26 
			 Devon and Cornwall 34 
			 Dorset 25 
			 Durham 34 
			 Essex 26 
			 Gloucestershire 31 
			 Greater Manchester 22 
			 Hampshire 29 
			 Hertfordshire 24 
			 Humberside 21 
			 Kent 28 
			 Lancashire 27 
			 Leicestershire 28 
			 Lincolnshire 25 
			 London, City of 27 
			 Merseyside 28 
			 Metropolitan Police 15 
			 Norfolk 26 
			 Northamptonshire 33 
			 Northumbria 31 
			 North Yorkshire 30 
			 Nottinghamshire 20 
			 South Yorkshire 25 
			 Staffordshire 23 
			 Suffolk 35 
			 Surrey 28 
			 Sussex 23 
			 Thames Valley 22 
			 Warwickshire 22 
			 West Mercia 27 
			 West Midlands 28 
			 West Yorkshire 23 
			 Wiltshire 30 
			 Dyfed-Powys 63 
			 Gwent 57 
			 North Wales 31 
			 South Wales 32 
			  
			 England and Wales 24

Immigration Service Personnel

Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Immigration Service personnel have been disciplined over their treatment of visa applicants since 1997; and if he will make a statement.

Angela Eagle: Accurate centralised records of disciplinary action taken against members of staff in the Immigration and Nationality Directorate have been held only since 1998. From that date, a total of 77 members of staff working within the United Kingdom Immigration Service have had disciplinary action taken against them, for various types of misconduct. One Immigration officer has been issued with a formal written reprimand after the inappropriate treatment of a visa applicant and inappropriate behaviour towards others.

Police Authorities (Efficiency Savings)

David Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many and which police authorities have met the Government target of 2 per cent. efficiency savings each year in the last three financial years.

John Denham: According to Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC), all 43 police forces in England and Wales achieved at least 2 per cent. efficiency savings in 1998–99, 1999–2000 and 2000–01. Under the public service agreement, forces are required to use efficiency gains for the benefit of front line policing.
	Copies of the relevant HMIC reports are in the Library.

Raves

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the discussions between his Department and the Association of Chief Police Officers regarding the issue of illegal rave gatherings on private property.

John Denham: As a result of recent and justified public concerns about this problem, we are discussing the issue of illegal raves with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to determine how existing legislation can be used more effectively and whether any legislative changes are required.

Association of Chief Police Officers

Ian Liddell-Grainger: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he last met the President of the Association of Chief Police Officers.

John Denham: holding answer 4 February 2002
	My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary last met Sir David Phillips, the President of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), on 12 February 2002. This was the latest in an ongoing programme of monthly bi-lateral meetings between the Home Secretary and the ACPO President.

Porton Down

Robert Key: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost has been of the Wiltshire Constabulary investigation into allegations of past criminal activity at DSTL Porton Down; and if he will make a statement.

John Denham: The Chief Constable informs me that the cost to Wiltshire Constabulary to the end of January 2002 was £1.62 million.
	A special grant in relation to the additional policing costs of the Porton Down investigation was made by the Home Office to Wiltshire Constabulary in August 2000 for £870,000.

Police Sick Leave

Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State 
	(1)  for the Home Department what the average number of days sickness absence per year was for (a) police officers and (b) support staff in the Cheshire Constabulary in each of the past five years;
	(2)  what the average number of days sickness absence was in each of the past five years for police officers in (a) Cheshire and (b) other forces in the North West.

John Denham: holding answer 25 February 2002
	The average number of days' sickness absence per police officer is shown in the table:
	
		
			 Police Force 1996–97 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 
		
		
			 Cheshire 13 14 13 12 14 
			 Cumbria 9 10 10 12 13 
			 Greater Manchester 15 15 14 14 15 
			 Lancashire 12 11 12 12 13 
			 Merseyside 19 12 11 12 13 
		
	
	The average number of days' sickness absence per member of Cheshire Constabulary's support staff was:
	1996–97: 16
	1997–98: 16
	1998–99: 16
	1999–2000: 14
	2000–01: 16

Victim Support

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when criminals in prison who are victims of a crime are informed of the criminal injuries compensation scheme; what the eligibility criteria are which are used by the CICS to determine if an application is acceptable; how many (a) ex-prisoners and (b) prisoners who have been victims of serious crime have received compensation from the CICS in each of the last five years; how much compensation such people have received; and what the basis was of each award.

Keith Bradley: The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme provides compensation to victims of violent crime. Victims of non-violent crime must look elsewhere for compensation or redress.
	Legal services officers in each prison establishment are able to provide information to prisoners about the scheme and how to apply for compensation if they have been the victim of a violent crime.
	The eligibility criteria are set out in the scheme itself, and the accompanying XGuide to Applicants" explains how applications are assessed against them. The scheme includes a provision enabling awards to be reduced or withheld on account of the applicant's record of criminal convictions.
	The scheme is administered by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA). They have no means of determining whether an applicant is an Xex-prisoner". Their only means of identifying current prisoners is by a computer search of applicants' addresses for the words XHer Majesty's (HM) Prison", and then excluding those who are prison officers. In the last five years the following awards have been made to those so identified as prisoners.
	1996–97: £5,000, £3,120, £3,750.
	1997–98: £1,260, £1,350*, £1,000*, £5,000.
	1998–99: £500, £500, £1,000.
	1999–2000: £3,500, £500, £5,375, £1,000, £8,700
	2000–01: £375.
	All but two of these awards (starred) were reduced awards. Thirty-seven applications remain outstanding.

Victim Support

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether criminals in prison who are victims of crime receive the support of the witness service at the Crown Court.

Beverley Hughes: The Witness Service, at both the Crown Court and magistrates' courts, is provided through the organisation Victim Support, whose grant from the Home Office in 2001–02 is £25 million.
	Victim Support advise that the Witness Service does offer support to those in custody at court buildings where they are appearing as witnesses in a trial, but not if they are appearing as defendants. Those supported may fall into one of the following categories: they are serving a sentence and the alleged crime took place in prison: they are on remand; or they have been brought in on a bench warrant.
	Where witness support is to be offered, the visit must be cleared with the police and prosecuting authority. Visits can only be made in the presence of one of those authorities for legal reasons.

Police Authority Performance Indicators

Christopher Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will publish the best value performance indicators for police authorities for 2002–03; and which indicators have been (a) deleted and (b) added since 2001–02.

John Denham: Proposed Best Value Performance Indicators went out for consultation on 16 January 2002; the consultation document set out changes to the previous suite of Performance Indicators. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary expects shortly to be in a position to make his decision in the light of comments received and to make an Order under Section 4(1) of the Local Government Act 1999. The results will be published.

Police Secondments

Christopher Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police officers are seconded from police authorities to (a) the National Criminal Intelligence Service, (b) the Police Staff College, (c) police training centres, (d) the International Police Task Force in Bosnia and (e) Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary.

John Denham: holding answer 25 February 2002
	The information is set out in the table:
	
		
			 Organisation Number of Police Officers1 
		
		
			 National Criminal Intelligence Service 271 
			 National Police Training—Bramshill 101 
			 Police Training Centres 447 
			 International Task Force in Bosnia 66 
			 Her Majesty's (HM) Inspectorate of Constabulary 52 
		
	
	1 National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) strength as at 30 September 2001 (as per Home Office Statistical Bulletin 23/01). All other figures are as at 15 February 2002.

Youth Offender Panels

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
	(1)  what action has been taken to launch youth offender panels; and what further action is planned;
	(2)  in which newspapers and on which radio stations membership of youth offender panels has been advertised.

Beverley Hughes: holding answer 27 February 2002
	Youth offending teams (Yots) throughout England and Wales are currently recruiting members of their local community to sit on youth offender panels. As this is a locally based initiative, action has been taken mainly on a local and regional basis. This has been boosted by national advertising targeted at specific groups who were under-represented in the pilot areas.
	The campaign has been supported by the Youth Justice Board which has provided Yots with press releases, posters, leaflets and a standard advertisement for use in local media. The Board has also set up a dedicated website and issued a promotional video.
	Some Yots have been very proactive launching their own radio advertising. Examples include radio stations in Berkshire, Bristol, Merseyside, Sheffield and Anglia TV.
	A press release was issued to the national media, which was reported in The Independent newspaper. National advertising has concentrated on the ethnic press, student magazines and The Big Issue.
	There will be further action in the run up to referral orders/youth offender panels going live on 1 April 2002 with a feature being offered to national magazines, trade journals, newspapers and broadcasters and the Youth Justice Board will again be asking Yots to promote panels to their local press.

Sex Offenders

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether sex offenders whose offences are deemed spent after the completion of youth offender panel orders must remain on the Sex Offenders' Register.

Beverley Hughes: holding answer 27 February 2002
	The Sex Offenders Act 1997 imposes requirements on offenders cautioned, convicted, or found not guilty by reason of insanity in respect of an offence specified in Schedule 1 to the Act for a specified period. The minimum duration specified is five years. However, the Act also provides that determinate periods will be halved when the offender in question is under the age of 18. Whether a conviction is spent, in the terms of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, has no impact on the requirements of the Sex Offenders Act.
	The review of Part 1 of the Sex Offenders Act 1997, which we published in July last year, contains a chapter on its application to children and young people who sexually abuse. The consultation period on the review ended on 19 October 2001 and we are currently considering responses to consultation.

Female Convictions

Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of women under sentence in prisons in England and Wales have been convicted of (a) violence against the person, (b) sexual offences, (c) robbery and (d) other offences.

Beverley Hughes: holding answer 27 February 2002
	Provisional data show that around 15 per cent. of all sentenced female prisoners in prisons in England and Wales on 31 January 2002 were convicted of violence against the person. Approximately 9 per cent. were convicted of robbery, and around 1 per cent. of sexual offences. The remaining 75 per cent. were convicted of other criminal offences.

Police Authority Priorities

Christopher Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will set out the reasons underlying the changes in ministerial priorities for police authorities for 2002–03 since 2001–02.

John Denham: Proposed changes to ministerial priorities went out for consultation on 16 January 2002. The consultation period is now over and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary expects shortly to be in a position to make his decision in the light of comments received, and to make an Order under Section 37(1) of the Police Act 1996.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Special Advisers

Tim Collins: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister on how many occasions since 1 May 1997 Special Advisers in his Department have travelled abroad in an official capacity; and if he will give the total cost, including (a) travel, (b) accommodation and (c) subsistence allowance for each occasion.

Christopher Leslie: Between 1 April 2000 and 31 March 2001, Special Advisers in the Cabinet Office travelled abroad on eight occasions, at an average cost of £1,706.46 per trip. Information for the period 2 May 1997 to 31 March 2000 is already in the public domain. All travel by Special Advisers is undertaken in accordance with the rules set out in the Ministerial Code, and the Civil Service Management Code.

Civil Defence Grant

Hugh Bayley: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister which minister is responsible for making civil defence grants under the Civil Defence Act 1948 as amended by the Civil Defence (Grants) Act 2002.

Christopher Leslie: The power to make civil defence grants rests in law with the Secretary of State and responsibility has been allocated to the First Secretary of State. An announcement will be made shortly on the formula to be used to determine the grant for eligible local authorities for the next financial year.

Refurbishment

John Bercow: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the cost of refurbishing each ministerial private office was in each year since May 1997.

Christopher Leslie: All works carried out during the period covered by the Question were undertaken as part of a 5 year rolling programme of maintenance and repair work necessary in order to maintain the fabric and content of the buildings to an acceptable level. Within such costs, to try to separately identify work undertaken on Ministerial Private Offices would incur disproportionate costs.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

Divisions

Pete Wishart: To ask the President of the Council how many divisions in the House of Commons this session have been on legislation for (a) the UK, (b) Great Britain only, (c) England and Wales only, (d) England only, (e) Northern Ireland only and (f) Scotland only.

Robin Cook: Discounting divisions on Programme Motions, the numbers are as follows:
	Total divisions on Government bills to date: 73 (leaving aside 22 on programme motions), broker down as follows.
	(a) UK legislation: 12 bills divided upon 43 divisions
	Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Bill:   21
	Employment Bill:   4
	European Communities (Amendment) Bill:   6
	Export Control Bill:   2
	Human Reproductive Cloning Bill:   1
	NHS Reform and Health Care Professions Bill:   6
	Tax Credits Bill:   3
	(b) Legislation extending to Great Britain only: 1 bill divided upon 4 divisions
	Civil Defence (Grant) Bill:   4
	(c) Legislation extending to England and Wales only: 5 bills divided upon 20 divisions
	Animal Health Bill:   6
	Education Bill:   11
	Football (Disorder) (Amendment) Bill:   2
	Travel Concessions (Eligibility) Bill:   1
	(d) Legislation extending to England only: Nil
	(e) Legislation extending to Northern Ireland only: 3 bills divided upon 6 divisions
	Electoral Fraud (Northern Ireland) Bill:   1
	Justice (Northern Ireland) Bill:   1
	Northern Ireland Arms Decommissioning (Amendment) Bill:   4
	(f) Legislation extending to Scotland only: Nil

Parliamentary Questions

Jim Dobbin: To ask the President of the Council what plans he has to change the rota for oral questions.

Robin Cook: Following my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale, East (Paul Goggins) on Wednesday 5 December 2001, Official Report, column 311W, the slot for Church Commissioners, Public Accounts Commission and Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission will be increased by 5 minutes and questions to the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport will correspondingly be reduced. This is for a trial period and will be reviewed again in the Summer.

WALES

Departmental Expenditure Limit

John Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans there are to amend the Wales Departmental Expenditure Limit for 2001–02.

Paul Murphy: The Wales Departmental Expenditure Limit will be increased by £79,129,000 from £8,534,916,000 to £8,614,357.000. The increase is a result of:
	(i) the take up of end year flexibility entitlement of £70,330,000.
	(ii) additional provision of:
	£430,000 for extended match funding for Foot and Mouth charities;
	£5,879,000 consequentials resulting from the Capital Modernisation Fund Round 3.
	(iii) net transfers from other government departments of £2,802,000.
	These transfers are as follows:
	(i) £40,000 from DEFRA to cover Pig Industry Restructuring - Outgoers Scheme.
	(ii) £57,000 to the Cabinet Office for Fast Stream Recruitment in 2001–2002.
	(iii) £200,000 from the Home Office for Crime Reduction.
	(iv) £80,000 from the Office of Government Commerce for e-procurement pilot.
	(v) £105,000 from the Home Office for Confiscated Assets Fund.
	(vi) £250,000 from the Forestry Commission for accruals adjustments.
	(vii) £18,000 from Department of Health Northern Ireland, for Out of Area Treatments.
	(viii) £1,786,000 from Department of Health for Out of Area Treatments.
	(ix) £163,000 from Department of Health for High Security Psychiatric Services.
	(x) £11,000 from Department of Health for Dental SIFT.
	(xi) £1,723,000 from Department of Health for Cross Border Flows.
	(xii) £1,097,000 to the Department of Health for Recostings.
	(xiii) £73,000 from the Scottish Parliament for Out of Area Treatments.
	(xiv) £400,000 to DEFRA for Carbon Trust EEBP Programme.
	(xv) £93,000 to Department of Health for contributions to Royal Colleges.
	The increase in DEL will be offset by transfers from other Departments, from the Reserve or take up of end-year flexibility and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.

Working Conditions and Practice

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many people are employed in his Department on a job share contract; and what percentage of vacant positions was advertised on this basis in the last 12 months.

Paul Murphy: Job sharing is only one of a number of alternative and flexible working patterns that staff at the Wales Office are welcome to take up. The flexibility of the pattern is decided in consultation with appropriate Branch management to suit an individual's need and the needs of their work.
	At the present time the Wales Office does not have any job share staff, but every position that is advertised at the Wales Office is open to alternative and flexible working patterns including job share. Currently, out of the 40 staff at the Wales Office 8 enjoy alternative and flexible working patterns.

Working Conditions and Practice

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assessment has been made of the effect of the Working Time Directive on his Department's employees; how many employees are working in excess of 48 hours per week; what steps he is taking to reduce this number; and if he will make a statement.

Paul Murphy: The Wales Office has a duty to ensure the health and safety of its staff. Hence no member of staff at the Wales Office is asked to work hours in excess of the Working Time Directive (an average of 48 hours a week over a 17-week period).
	One member of staff has voluntarily opted out of this directive.

Entertainment Costs

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list for 1997–98 and for each subsequent financial year, including the current year to date, the amount spent by (a) his Department, (b) its agencies and (c) its non-departmental public bodies on (i) food and (ii) alcohol, indicating how much was spent on guests, and how much in respect of (A) Ministers and (B) staff, broken down to show how much was provided directly by his Department and how much reclaimed.

Paul Murphy: This information is not available in the form requested.

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Litter Offences

Gareth Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list the (a) attempted and (b) successful prosecutions of those accused of litter offences, broken down by offence for London boroughs in each year since 1995.

Michael Meacher: This detailed data are not held centrally. However, information that is available for England and Wales in 1999 showed that there were 501 attempted prosecutions and 390 successful prosecution in a magistrates court.

Private Medical Insurance

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many employees in (a) her Department and (b) her Department's agencies and non-departmental public bodies have had private medical insurance provided for them in each year since 1997–98; what the total cost is; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 6 February 2002
	The Department follows the guidance in paragraph 7.1.7 of the Civil Service Management Code which prohibits Departments and agencies from providing staff with private medical insurance.
	Non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) are not bound by the Management Code and have provided the following benefits:
	
		
			  1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 
		
		
			 Number of Employees 275 286 298 307 
			 Total Cost £147k £148k £131k £157k

Ozone Depleting Substances

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when the UK standards on the recovery of ozone depleting substances will be published; and if she will make a statement.

Michael Meacher: The Department published draft standards for the recovery of controlled ozone depleting substances from fridges and freezers in December 2001. The Environment Agency are now finalising these standards and a draft of the final version will be issued this month.

Biosafety Protocol

Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she intends to ratify the biosafety protocol.

Margaret Beckett: Ratification of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety by the United Kingdom is partly dependent on legislative action at the European Community level. The European Commission is shortly due to issue proposals for such legislation. The UK will press for early progress in negotiations on these proposals, so that we may be in a position to ratify the Protocol before the end of this year.

Kyoto Protocol

Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she intends to ratify the Kyoto protocol.

Margaret Beckett: For legal and presentational reasons, the UK will ratify the Kyoto protocol at the same time as the European Community and other Member States. At the European Council on 31 October 2001, the EU stressed
	Xthe Community's and its Member States' resolve to complete their ratification procedures in time for timely ratification with a view to entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol by the World Summit on Sustainable Development" in 2002.
	The first step in the process is for the EC to ratify the protocol through the adoption of a Council Decision that will include further clarification on the arrangements for implementing the agreement between the EC and its Member States in 1998 on sharing out the EC's 8 per cent target. A Council Decision dealing with these issues is currently under discussion and is expected to be adopted at the next Environment Council on 4 March 2002.

Nitrates

Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will estimate the annual cost to individual farmers of the proposed implementation of the 1991 Nitrate Vulnerable Zones Directive; and what system of monitoring her Department proposes to establish for policing the use of nitrogen in nitrate vulnerable zones.

Michael Meacher: The annual cost of complying with the record keeping requirements of the Nitrates Directive is estimated at an average of £200 per farm. Where farmers need to take further action to comply with the Directive, the total costs of such additional action is estimated as up to £12.5m per annum across England in total. However, these extra costs would not be meaningful expressed as an average per farmer because they will vary considerably between individual farms depending on their individual circumstances.
	It is intended to extend the Farm Waste Grant Scheme to the new areas where farmers will be required to take action to tackle nitrate pollution. This will make financial assistance available to those farmers who face the greatest costs, for example because they need to construct new slurry storage to comply with closed periods for spreading manure on vulnerable soils. The grant rate is currently 40 per cent (the EU State Aid Rules maximum) for construction or upgrade of storage facilities up to an investment ceiling of £85,000. We are currently considering offering 50 per cent in Less Favoured Areas, as permitted by the EU State Aid Rules. From experience in current NVZs, the average cost of new slurry storage construction to comply with Action Programme measures is between £30,000 and £40,000.
	The Environment Agency will be responsible for enforcing compliance in the new areas where farmers are required to take action to reduce nitrate pollution, as well as in existing Nitrate Vulnerable Zones. The Agency propose to develop a risk based approach to enforcement, for instance by relating the frequency and nature of inspection to the risk of pollution.

Flood Defences

Nigel Beard: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the tidal surge which hit the Thames Estuary and the North Kent Coast on 29 January, with special reference to the adequacy of the flood defences along the Erith, Crayford and Dartford stretch of the river bank and the risk of the River Thames flooding in this area.

Elliot Morley: A tidal surge occurred on the morning tide of 29 January 2002, which was below the level where the Thames barrier is activated though some of the other estuary barriers were closed. There was no danger to life or property in this event.
	The tidal flood defences between Erith and Dartford, along the north Kent coast are inspected and maintained regularly. These defences form part of the overall flood protection system on the tidal Thames, which, with the barriers closed, are designed to provide a high standard of protection against events with a current annual probability of less then 0.1 per cent. (X1 in 1,000 year").

Foot and Mouth

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for what reason it was necessary for veterinarians to wait in excess of 24 hours before obtaining permission to slaughter animals identified as suffering from foot and mouth disease.

Elliot Morley: It is not the case that veterinarians had to wait more than 24 hours for permission to slaughter animals infected with foot and mouth disease. The National Disease Control Centre (NDCC) was responsible for the confirmation of disease based on telephone reports from field staff. On 21 March, the then Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food agreed that field staff could slaughter animals that they believed were infected with foot and mouth disease, without authority, if they were unable to contact the NDCC within two hours.
	In a survey of Temporary Veterinary Inspectors, the British Veterinary Association found that it took TVI's on average, 14.5 minutes to get through to the NDCC and that the longest wait was 2 hours. The average response time by the NDCC was 10 minutes and the longest wait for a response was 4 hours.

Foot and Mouth

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the incubation period for the foot and mouth disease is in (a) cattle and (b) sheep.

Elliot Morley: The incubation period for foot and mouth varies according to the infecting dose, the strain of the virus and the susceptibility of the infected animal. The most likely incubation period for all species is 5 days. The common range of incubation is accepted at between 3 to 8 days, although the maximum range is between 2 and 14 days.

Foot and Mouth

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what percentage of the foot and mouth compensation payments were made by the (a) UK and (b) EU; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: All compensation payments related to foot and mouth disease have been made by the UK Government. EU Member States may claim up to 60 per cent of eligible costs incurred during the control of foot and mouth disease from the European Commission. In June 2001, my Department submitted a claim to the Commission based on estimated costs of £1,153 million. An updated claim based on costs of £1,663 million was submitted in October.
	In accordance with Commission Decision 2001/654/EC of 16 August 2001, detailed initial information has been submitted to the Commission in support of the UK's claim and we are in regular contact with Commission officials in furtherance of the claim.

Gas Emissions

David Rendel: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the total UK (a) carbon dioxide emissions and (b) other greenhouse gas emissions were; and what the percentage change was in each of the last 10 years.

Michael Meacher: The table shows the amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases (methane, nitrous oxide, HFCs, PFCs and SF6) emitted during the years 1990 to 1999. (Records for 2000 are not yet complete.) The percentage change in emissions for each year compared to the previous year, and for each year compared to 1990 is also shown for each gas.
	
		
			  1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 
		
		
			 CO2(Mt) 602.8 606.7 591.9 576.3 572.4 563.4 583.0 558.0 560.3 547.8 
			 %  0.64 -2.43 -2.63 -0.68 -1.57 3.47 -4.28 0.40 -2.22 
			 % (1990)  0.64 -1.81 -4.39 -5.04 -6.54 -3.29 -7.43 -7.06 -9.13 
			 CH4(Mt) 3.67 3.62 3.53 3.38 3.07 3.05 2.98 2.89 2.76 2.63 
			 %  -1.36 -2.49 -4.25 -9.17 -0.65 -2.30 -3.02 -4.50 -4.71 
			 % (1990)  -1.36 -3.81 -7.90 -16.35 -16.89 -18.80 -21.25 -24.80 -28.34 
			 N2O(Mt) 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.19 0.18 0.19 .0.19 0.19 0.14 
			 %  -4.55 -9.52 -5.26 5.56 -5.26 5.56 0.00 0.00 -26.32 
			 % (1990)  -4.55 -13.64 -18.18 -13.64 -18.18 -13.64 -13.64 -13.64 -36.36 
			 HFC(kt) 0.973 1.025 1.074 1.162 1.451 1.956 2.472 3.067 3.660 2.749 
			 %  5.34 4.78 8.19 24.87 34.80 26.38 24.07 19.33 -24.89 
			 % (1990)  5.34 10.38 19.42 49.13 101.03 154.06 215.21 276.16 182.53 
			 PFC(kt) 0.331 0.259 0.137 0.115 0.140 0.157 0.130 0.095 0.094 0.098 
			 %  -21.75 -47.10 -16.06 21.74 12.14 -17.20 -26.92 -1.05 4.26 
			 % (1990)  -21.75 -58.61 -65.26 -57.70 -52.57 -60.73 -71.30 -71.60 -70.39 
			 SF6(kt) 0.030 0.032 0.035 0.037 0.044 0.047 0.053 0.053 0.054 0.055 
			 %  6.67 9.38 5.71 18.92 6.82 12.77 0.00 1.89 1.85 
			 % (1990)  6.67 16.67 23.33 46.67 56.67 76.67 76.67 80.00 83.33

Precautionary Principle

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on her Department's policy regarding the precautionary principle.

Elliot Morley: The precautionary principle holds that the absence of scientific proof should not delay or prevent proportionate measures to remove or reduce threats of serious harm. Where there is scientific uncertainty DEFRA will adopt a precautionary approach where it is considered appropriate. In doing this, we are mindful of the EU Council resolution on the precautionary principle and of the Government's response to the report of the BSE Inquiry.

Refurbishment

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to her answer of 25 January 2002, Official Report, column 1161W, what the cost of refurbishing each Ministerial private office was in each year since May 1997.

Elliot Morley: MAFF Ministers' private offices moved from Whitehall Place West to Nobel House, Smith Square, in 1997/98. The cost of the move was £38,000. In addition, alterations to prepare the accommodation for Ministers and senior officials cost £240,000 and £54,000 was spent on new furniture. The offices vacated in Whitehall Place West were subsequently occupied by MAFF officials at no additional cost.
	No further refurbishment work has been undertaken on Ministers' private offices since 1997–98.

Fisheries (Prosecutions)

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many successful prosecutions were brought against fishing vessels during the last five years for (a) catching of undersized fish, (b) landing of undersized fish, (c) using illegal nets and trawls, (d) irregularities in log book, (e) having a catch in excess of quote and (f) other reasons.

Elliot Morley: Information on the total number of successful prosecutions involving fishing vessels during the period 1997 to 2001 for the following types of offences is set out in the table below.
	
		
			 Type of offence Number of successful prosecutions 
		
		
			 Retaining on board or landing undersized fish 26 
			 Use/carriage of illegal nets 44 
			 Logbook offences 77 
			 Retaining on board or landing over quota species 57 
			 Other 110 
		
	
	For the purpose of the table prosecutions involving both the owner and master have been treated as a single case. Some cases may involve more than one offence under one or more of the above headings.

Fisheries (Prosecutions)

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  on how many occasions successful prosecutions have been brought against fishing vessels in the past five years for which records are available; and how many were (a) UK-registered, British-crewed vessels, (b) UK-registered flag of convenience vessels and (c ) non-UK registered vessels;
	(2)  on how many occasions enforcement action has been taken against fishing vessels by her Department in the last five years for which records are available.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 27 February 2002
	The number of successful prosecutions in respect of UK and non UK registered vessels by this Department during the period 1997 to 2001 were:
	239 UK registered vessels
	75 non-UK registered vessels
	The totals above include vessels which have been prosecuted on more than one occasion. Our prosecution records do not distinguish whether UK registered vessels were crewed by UK or foreign nationals.

Fisheries

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what budget has been employed by her Department to manage the fisheries enforcement operation in England for each year for the past five years.

Elliot Morley: Information about the financial resources devoted to fisheries control and enforcement by this Department is set out in the following table:
	
		
			  £ million 
		
		
			 1996–97 12.6 
			 1997–98 12.6 
			 1998–99 11.8 
			 1999–2000 11.1 
			 2000–01 11.8

Fisheries

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  how much of the fines paid by fishing owners and skippers following their prosecution is paid to her Department; and who else receives income from these fines;
	(2)  how much her Department has recovered from fishing vessel owners and skippers following successful prosecutions for each year for the past five years for which records are available.

Elliot Morley: Responsibility for collecting fines imposed following a successful prosecution rests with the Courts concerned. No fines are paid to this Department.

IACS Payments

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what percentage of farmers who were under Form D restrictions qualify for IACS payments; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: This information is not readily available and could be collected only at disproportionate cost. However, it is likely that most of the farmers concerned would have been claimants under schemes covered by IACS.

Badgers

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many badgers there were in (a) Gloucestershire and (b) the UK in each of the last 10 years for which figures are available.

Elliot Morley: No annual data on the number of badgers exist either at county or national level.
	Based upon two surveys the number of badgers in Great Britain is estimated to be between 300,000 and 400,000. The latest survey which was conducted in the mid-1990s revealed an increase in badger numbers of around seventy per cent compared with the first survey which was undertaken in the mid-1980s. These surveys indicated that the badger population in the south-west region as a whole increased approximately in line with the national trend.

Bovine TB

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what action she is taking on the preliminary results of the trials being conducted on tuberculosis in cattle; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: On the basis of advice from the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB, results from the badger field trial, which is part of the Government's wide ranging strategy to tackle TB in cattle, are expected by the end of 2004. The Government liaise closely with the group and any preliminary findings that may emerge in the interim will be considered in the light of advice from the group.

Bovine TB

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on recent changes in the rate of tuberculosis in cattle in (a) Gloucestershire and (b) the UK.

Elliot Morley: TB in cattle is continuing to give considerable concern particularly in counties such as Gloucestershire which has persistently had a higher incidence of the disease than most other areas of the country. Incidence of bovine TB is increasing in England and Wales, and the Government have in place an extensive research programme so that control strategies can be developed on the basis of sound science, and on the basis of advice from independent scientific and veterinary experts.

Bovine TB

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many herds have been tested for tuberculosis and how many were found positive in (a) Gloucestershire and (b) England in the last 12 months; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: Provisional data indicate that in the 12 months to December 2001 8,211 tuberculin tests on cattle herds were undertaken in England of which 523 were in Gloucestershire. From these tests a total of 337 new confirmed bovine tuberculosis incidents were recorded for England of which 35 were in Gloucestershire.

Bovine TB

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many herds are under restriction through tuberculosis (a) in England and (b) in Gloucestershire; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: Provisional data as at 31 January 2002 indicate that there were 767 herds under movement restrictions in England as a result of tuberculosis breakdown, of which 113 were in Gloucestershire. On the same data and on the basis of veterinary risk assessment further control measures were introduced, resulting in an additional 631 herds being placed under restriction in England of which 120 were in Gloucestershire.

Bovine TB

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what investigations she has made of the experience in the Republic of Ireland of tuberculosis in cattle; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: In implementing its wide ranging research and control strategy the Department is advised by the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB. It also has a TB animal vaccine programme adviser. The group, the Vaccine Programme adviser and Departmental officials visited Ireland last autumn to investigate the work being undertaken in that country.

Plastic Recycling

Owen Paterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what she estimates the cost will be of starting a scheme for plastic sheet recycling for farmers;
	(2)  what the estimated weight is of unrecycled plastic in the countryside; and what its environmental impact is.

Michael Meacher: An estimated 43,000 tonnes a year of non-packaging plastic waste is produced on farms. In addition, it is estimated that there is about 45,000 tonnes a year of plastic packaging waste on farms. Currently, there are only a small number of local voluntary schemes in operation to collect farm plastics for recycling.
	We are at present developing a Regulatory Impact Assessment to assess the various costs and benefits of the options for introducing a scheme to collect and recycle farm plastics. This RIA will be included in the forthcoming consultation document on the application to agricultural waste of the Waste Framework Directive.

Refrigerators

Michael Jack: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what receipts there have been for (a) each county and (b) other waste disposal authorities of the additional moneys made available for the disposal of old refrigerators and freezers.

Michael Meacher: In early December 2001, I announced a payment of £6 million to cover local authority costs from January to March 2002. This payment will be made through the Revenue Support Grant for 2002–2003 and will be distributed to waste disposal authorities according to the Standard Spending Assessment Formula. We are monitoring the impact of the Regulation to assess what further action is required.

Parliamentary Questions

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  when she will reply to question 3689; and if she will make a statement.
	(2)  when she will reply to question 3690; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him on 11 February 2002, Official Report, column 88W.

Parliamentary Questions

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  when she will reply to question 3534; and if she will make a statement.
	(2)  When she will reply to question 3537; and if she will make a statement.

Elliot Morley: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him on 25 January 2002, Official Report, columns 1169-70W.

Hunting With Dogs

Ian Cawsey: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the government's policy on hunting with dogs.

Alun Michael: The Government intend to provide an opportunity for each House to debate a motion which will allow Members to vote for and against each of the three options which were presented to the House during the last Parliament. This will fulfil the first part of our promise by giving the House an early opportunity to express its view. We will then consider, in the light of the votes and the views expressed during the debates in both Houses, how to deliver the second part of that commitment, to
	Xenable Parliament to reach a conclusion on this issue". The Government will make a statement on the way forward before Easter in response to the debate and vote in both Houses.

TRANSPORT, LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE REGIONS

Rail Safety

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions 
	(1)  what proportions of slam shut carriages have been converted to the cone and cup safety mechanism;
	(2)  if the removal from the rail network of those slam shut carriages not converted to the cone and cup safety mechanism will be achieved by December;
	(3)  if slam shut carriages will be converted to the cone and cup safety mechanism by December 2002.

John Spellar: This issue is dealt with by Railway Safety Regulations 1999.

Rail Passengers

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answer of 17 December 2001, Official Report, column 18W, on rail passengers, what is the frequency of the regular surveys and, in relation to the action plans (a) which train operating companies have been required to implement such a plan since 1995, (b) when these have taken place, (c) what these action plans have required from each train operating company, (d) what outcomes have resulted from any action plans and (e) how progress towards the action plans is measured and (f) what steps he plans to take to improve the co-ordination and standard of customer satisfaction surveys and national passenger surveys.

John Spellar: Train Operating Companies (TOCs) have a contractual commitment to carry out customer satisfaction surveys at least every six months. Following the results of the surveys a number of TOCs have been required to undertake a variety of action plans. These action plans become contractual commitments and are monitored continuously by the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) to ensure they are fulfilled.
	Details of improvement to services for passengers being implemented by each TOC, including those derived from surveys and action plans are listed in the regular SRA On Track publication, which also summarises National Passenger Survey results. It is the SRA's aim that all TOCs will be measured and monitored by the National Passenger Survey under the Franchise Agreement rather their own customer satisfaction surveys.

Enron

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what meetings (a) he and (b) his senior departmental officials have had with Enron and its subsidiaries in the last two years.

Alan Whitehead: It is not the normal practice of the Government to release details of meetings or discussions with private individuals or companies.

Accounting Contracts

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many contracts were let by his Department and agencies for which he is responsible to (a) PWC Consulting or PricewaterhouseCoopers, (b) Ernst & Young, (c) Deloitte & Touche, (d) KPMG and (e) Andersen for consultancy services for the financial years (i) 1997–98, (ii) 1998–99, (iii) 1999–2000, (iv) 2000–01 and (v) 2001 to the latest date for which figures are available, indicating the remuneration in each case.

Annabelle Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will publish the (a) number and (b) value of contracts awarded by his Department to (i) Arthur Andersen, (ii) Deloitte Touche, (iii) Ernst and Young, (iv) KPMG and (v) PricewaterhouseCoopers accountants in each year since 1997.

Alan Whitehead: Individual Government Departments are responsible for taking decisions on the goods and services they acquire, whether through the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) or other procurement routes,taking into account the Government's policy of seeking value for money for the taxpayer. The public sector as a whole has signed hundreds of contracts, covering the delivery of a range of services.
	Detail of contracts and payments made by my Department to the firms listed are set out in the tables. The information is based on that held in DTLR's central records and that held centrally by agencies.
	
		Number of Contracts
		
			  PWC Ernst & Young Deloitte & Touche KPMG Andersen 
		
		
			 1997–98 5 1 0 2 1 
			 1998–99 3 0 0 2 0 
			 1999–2000 6 1 1 3 1 
			 2000–01 10 0 3 2 0 
			 2001–02 2 6 1 3 2 
		
	
	
		Value of Payments Made to Contractors 
		
			  PWC£ Ernst & Young£ Deloitte & Touche£ KPMG£ Andersen£ 
		
		
			 1997–98 800,000.00 65,082.10 0 705,111.00 0 
			 1998–99 11,572.08 0 0 75,206.00 0 
			 1999–2000 1,208,054.89 95.00 963,395.80 1,557,707.27 71,351,88 
			 2000–01 973,897.00 179,638.37 3,950,854.35 1,695,751.26 5,052.50 
			 2001–02 9,393,379.87 7,970,711.15 1,646,438.61 2,329,430.39 325,753.40 
		
	
	Note: The value of certain contracts is not divisible between years and so payments have been accorded to the first year of the contract.

Special Purpose Vehicles

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will define a special purpose vehicle in the context of the railways.

Stephen Byers: holding answer 8 February 2002
	The concept of a special purpose vehicle is a separate joint venture company set up to finance and manage one or more rail infrastructure projects. Parties in the company might include any combination of the Strategic Rail Authority, Railtrack, train operators, construction and project management firms and third-party investors.

London Underground

Peter Atkinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions which journalists, and from which publications, were invited to the briefing given on the future of the London Underground on 6 February.

David Jamieson: holding answer 12 February 2002
	There was no briefing given on 6 February. DTLR officials gave technical briefings on Monday 4 February and Tuesday 5 February to broadcast media and transport correspondents respectively.
	These briefings were on the technical detail of the bidding process including value for money issues and the public sector comparator. Obviously, prior to the London Transport Board meeting on Thursday 7 February, these briefings did not cover London Transport's Xminded" decision on way ahead for the Tube PPP, which was not taken until that meeting.

10-Year Plan

Christopher Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, pursuant to his answers of 7 February 2002, Official Report, column 1108W, refs 33767 and 33769, on the transport 10-year financial envelope, if he will set out the changes to the planned expenditure envelope which result in the overall increase and the amount of the increase attributable to each change.

David Jamieson: holding answer 28 February 2002
	The latest 10-Year Plan total of £181.9 billion announced by the Secretary of State in an oral and written answer on 29 January 2002, Official Report, columns 149-152 and 175W, took account of a number of changes to the 10-Year Plan expenditure numbers. The main changes were the following:
	1. The fact that the public expenditure numbers for 2001/02 reflect actual spending between April and December 2001 (the first nine months of the Plan) and take account of the latest outturn projection for that year;
	2. reductions of £38/118/183 million for the years 2001/02 to 2003/04 as a result of internal DETR reallocations immediately following SR2000.
	3. a transfer of £2.3 billion from the 10 Year Plan Unallocated Fund to Railways;
	4. £1.5 billion of additional provision for Railways;
	5. £462 million of additional provision for Railways to cover a shortfall in Railtrack's freight income;
	6. a transfer of £77 million from London to Railways to cover he SRA's contribution to CrossRail development costs;
	7. the inclusion of £290 million of unused provision for Railways carried forward as end-year flexibility from 2000–01 to 2001–02;
	8. no changes have been made to the private investment numbers.
	The effect of these changes is summarised in the revised version of Table A3 from 'Transport 2010: The 10 Year Plan' that I referred to in my answer to the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Foster) on 25 February 2002, Official Report, column 785W, and which has been placed in the Libraries of the House.

Social Services Spending

Anne Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will list for shire counties 
	(1)  the social services SSA for child protection, divided by the number of children under the age of 18, adjusted for inflation at current values, in the years 1990–91 to 2001–02 and projected for 2002-03.
	(2)  the social services divided by total population, adjusted for inflation at current values, for the years 1990–91 to 2001–02 and projected for 2002–03.
	(3)  the total SSA, divided by the population financed by that county, adjusted for inflation at current values (a) of the years 1990–91 to 2001–02 and (b) projected or 2002-03.

Alan Whitehead: A table has been placed in the Libraries of the House. The figures are quoted as they were announced each year. It has not been possible to construct a run of figures over the period that are adjusted for changes in function or financing arrangements. Some year on year changes shown in the table are, therefore, not on a like for like basis.

Standard Spending Assessment

Anne Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will list the standard spending assessments per (a) pensioner and (b) young person under the age of 18 by county council for England and Wales in each year from 1990–91 to 2001–02, and projected for the financial year 2002–03, adjusted for inflation at current values.

Alan Whitehead: The Department does not keep data on people of pensionable age covering the entire period, nor on standard spending assessments for local authorities in Wales. A table showing, for each English county council, the total standard spending assessment per person aged 65 or over, adjusted for inflation at current values has been placed in Libraries of the House, together with a table showing the total standard spending assessment per person aged 0 to 17, adjusted for inflation at current values.
	The figures are quoted as they were announced each year. It has not been possible to construct a run of figures over the period that are adjusted for changes in function or financing arrangements. Some year on year changes shown in the table are, therefore, not on a like for like basis.

Advertising

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions, if he will list the publicity and advertising campaigns run by his Department in each of the last four years, specifying the (a) purpose, (b) cost to the public funds, (c) number of staff involved and (d) method of evaluation in each case.

Alan Whitehead: For details of the publicity and advertising campaigns run by my Department in each of the last 4 years, together with purpose, cost and how we evaluate campaigns. I refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr Turner) on 24 January 2002, Official Report, column 1037W, and to the replies by the then Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, my hon. Friend the Member for Stretford and Urmston (Beverley Hughes), to the hon. Member for Hertsmere (Mr. Clappison) on 20 December 2000, Official Report, columns 168–69W, and to the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Mr. Lansley) on 23 April 2001, Official Report, columns 57W–59W.
	DTLR currently employs seventeen paid publicity specialists who work on a range of public information services including advertising campaigns.

Asset Transfers

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what (a) research, (b) consultation and (c) discussions his Department has carried out since 1997 on the legal definition and status of asset transfers.

Alan Whitehead: Assets are defined in the Accounting Standards Board's Financial Reporting Standard (FRS) 5 as Xrights or other access to future economic benefits controlled by an entity as a result of past transactions or events". Future economic benefits, in this context, means that the asset will contribute in some way to the provision of services or other outputs by Departments. Control, in this context, means the ability to obtain those benefits in fulfilment of aims and objectives of the entity and to restrict the access of others.
	In accounting for asset transfers we follow the guidance of HM Treasury's XResource Accounting Manual" (TRAM) and XGovernment Accounting". TRAM states at paragraph 3.2.36 that XWhere tangible fixed assets are transferred between Government Departments, other than in connection with either a transfer of functions from one Department to another or a merger of Departments, the transfer price should be calculated in accordance with an assessment of the fair values on an equivalent basis to that required by FRS 7 for the attribution of fair values to tangible fixed assets acquired on a business combination". Government Accounting, at paragraph 24.4.2, states that: XTransfers of assets (including assignments of leases) at less than full market value should be accounted for as gifts. The value of the gift will be the difference between the open market value and the price at which it is transferred".
	Our accounting actions are based upon the decisions and requests of the asset owners upon whom fall the legal responsibilities of asset management.

Railway Network Grants

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the network grants for railways to which his Department is contractually committed.

David Jamieson: The profile of network grant payments is set out in Appendix D of the Rail Regulator's October 2000 Periodic Review and, reflecting the April 2001 agreement between Government and Railtrack, in the appendices to the Regulator's published letter to Railtrack of 9 April 2001.

Road Maintenance (Scotland)

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what discussions he has had with the Scottish Executive about road maintenance contracts.

David Jamieson: Road maintenance contracts in Scotland are a matter for the Scottish Executive.
	DTLR officials regularly meet Scottish Executive officials in the fora of the Roads Liaison Group and its associated boards, which were set up last year to bring together representatives of all highway authorities in the UK to discuss and advise on issues relating to the construction and maintenance of highways.

Traffic Calming

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what guidance he gives to groups of residents where the Local Government Ombudsman rules against a local authority over the validity of a consultation prior to the introduction of a traffic calming scheme, but decides to take no further action.

Sally Keeble: It is for individual local authorities to consider what action to take following a recommendation from the Local Government Ombudsman.

Rough Sleepers

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many rough sleepers were counted in market towns in the last five years for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.

Sally Keeble: On 3 December 2001 the Prime Minister announced that the Rough Sleepers Unit had achieved its target of reducing rough sleeping by at least two-thirds by 2002.
	Local authorities and voluntary agencies conduct rough sleeping counts and collate the information. Tables showing all the local authority estimates and street count results for 1998, 1999, 2000 and the latest figures for 2001 were placed in the Libraries of the House on 11 December 2001. Local authorities not listed in the tables for those years submitted either an estimate of 0–10 or no estimate in their HIP returns.

Railtrack

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what information was provided to him by the administrator about the total level of (a) short-term and (b) long-term indebtedness of Railtrack at the point of implementation of the administration order.

David Jamieson: None.

Vehicle Excise Duty

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what assessment he has made of the impact of the extension of the reduced rate of vehicle excise duty to cars with engines up to 1200cc.

David Jamieson: We have not yet undertaken any formal analysis of the raising of the threshold for the reduced rate of vehicle excise duty to cars with engines up to 1200cc. We intend to assess in due course the impact of the range of reforms to vehicle excise duty for cars introduced between 1999 and 2001.

Shoreham Port Authority

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions by what means the current vacancies on the Board of Shoreham Port Authority have been publicised.

David Jamieson: The current vacancies on the Shoreham Port Authority were advertised in the local and regional press, including:
	The Evening Argus
	The Brighton & Hove Leader
	The South Coast Leader
	The Mid-Sussex Leader
	Scoop
	Fishersgate job website
	Appointments South East (Argus and Kent Messenger)
	The Worthing Herald
	The Shoreham Herald
	The Lancing Gazette
	The West Sussex Gazette
	The Chichester Observer
	The Bognor Observer
	The Littlehampton Observer
	The Eastbourne Herald
	The Eastbourne Advertiser
	and the free press in Worthing, Shoreham, Lancing and Littlehampton.
	The Trades Union Congress were also invited to nominate candidates for one of the advertised posts.

Shoreham Port Authority

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what opportunities constituents of the hon. Member for East Worthing and Shoreham living in the vicinity of Shoreham Harbour have to be considered as recruits to the Board of the Shoreham Port Authority.

David Jamieson: Currently, three appointments to the Shoreham Port Authority are made directly by the Secretary of State. These three appointments are publicly advertised and it is open to all who meet the criteria as set in the advertisement to apply for those posts.
	Six other appointments are made by the Secretary of State following consultation with various stakeholder groups. The practice is for those groups to nominate appropriate candidates based on a criteria set by the Shoreham Port Authority.

Planning Applications

Hugh Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions under what conditions he will call in planning applications in an area of outstanding natural beauty.

Sally Keeble: The Secretary of State's general approach is not to interfere with the jurisdiction of local planning authorities unless it is necessary to do so. Parliament has entrusted them with responsibility for day-to-day planning control in their areas. Local planning authorities are normally best placed to make decisions relating to their areas and it is right that, in general, they should be free to carry out their duties responsibly, with the minimum of interference.
	There will be occasions, however, when the Secretary of State may consider it necessary to call in a planning application to determine himself instead of leaving it to the local planning authority. His policy is to be very selective about calling in planning applications. He will, in general, only take this step if planning issues of more than local importance are involved and if those issues need to be decided by the Secretary of State rather than at local level. Each case is, however, considered on its own facts.

Planning Applications

Hugh Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the conditions for granting industrial planning permission in an area designated as an area of outstanding natural beauty.

Sally Keeble: Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) note 7 sets out national planning guidance for the Countryside including areas of outstanding natural beauty (AONBs). It states that planning policies and development control decisions affecting AONBs should favour conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape, and that the environmental effects of new proposals will be a major consideration, though it will also be appropriate to have regard to the economic and social well-being of the area. PPG7 also states that major projects should be demonstrated to be in the public interest before being allowed to proceed.

Road Accidents

Alex Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions how many (a) fatalities and (b) injuries have occurred involving buses and (i) other buses, (ii) other road vehicles and (iii) pedestrians in each year since 1997.

David Jamieson: The information requested is shown in the tables which follow. Figures for 2001 are not yet available. The figures shown relate to accidents on public roads in Great Britain.
	
		(i) Occupant casualties in two-vehicle accidents involving a bus or coach with another bus or coach
		
			  Fatalities Injuries 
		
		
			 1997 0 339 
			 1998 0 347 
			 1999 0 321 
			 2000 0 424 
		
	
	
		(ii) Occupant casualties in two-vehicle accidents involving a bus or coach and another type of vehicle1
		
			  Fatalities Injuries 
		
		
			 1997 46 6,733 
			 1998 40 7,384 
			 1999 41 7,409 
			 2000 48 7,322 
		
	
	1 Includes casualties in both vehicles involved but excludes pedestrian casualties.
	
		(iii) Pedestrian casualties hit by a bus or coach: Great Britain
		
			  Fatalities Injuries 
		
		
			 1997 55 1,706 
			 1998 62 1,723 
			 1999 69 1,906 
			 2000 608 1,963 
		
	
	In addition to those casualties shown in tables (i), (ii) and (iii) there were some bus or coach occupants casualties in single-vehicle accidents and additional vehicle occupant casualties in accidents which involved a bus or coach and more than one other vehicle. All of those have been included in the following table which shows all casualties in accidents which involved at least one bus or coach.
	
		All casualties1 in accidents involving at least one bus or coach
		
			  Fatalities Injuries 
		
		
			 1997 129 15,485 
			 1998 152 16,081 
			 1999 145 16,567 
			 2000 149 16,412 
		
	
	1 Includes pedestrians, bus and coach occupants and the occupants of other vehicles.

Road Accidents

Alex Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will estimate revenues from council tax and business rates (a) for the United Kingdom as a whole and (b) for each constituent nation of the UK in (i) 2001–02 and (ii) 2002–03.

Alan Whitehead: The table gives the estimated net yield from business rates for 2001–02 and 2002–03 for England. In addition the estimated council tax net yield in England for 2001–02 is shown. This information is based on returns provided by English local authorities to the Department. No estimate of the council tax yield for 2002–03 is yet available.
	
		
			  2001–02 £ billion 2002–03 £ billion 
		
		
			 Business Rates (a) 14.223 14.857 
			 Council Tax (b) 15.245 n/a 
		
	
	(a) Net of reliefs but including allowances for losses in collection and cost of collection.
	(b) Including council tax funded by benefit.
	Figures are not available for the United Kingdom as a whole. Information on business rates and council tax in Wales and Scotland are a matter for the National Assembly for Wales and the Scottish Executive respectively. Information on rates in Northern Ireland is a matter for the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Strathclyde Passenger Transport Authority

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what directions have been given to Strathclyde Passenger Transport Authority regarding security measures since 11 September 2001; by whom; and why such directions were given.

David Jamieson: Officials from the Transport Security Division are responsible for interfacing with the railways industry on security requirements. These requirements are contained in the National Railways Security Programme. Further guidance is issued to the industry, including Strathclyde Passenger Transport, on a regular basis. This system establishes appropriate security standards for industry.
	Further advice is issued in the format of Railway Security Circulars which provide a mechanism to update the National Railways Security Programme. These are sent to a nominated security contact within each railway-affiliated company, and are then disseminated internally to relevant parties.
	Railway Security Circulars are usually issued on a monthly basis. However, since the attacks on the United States of America on 11 September, my officials have issued eight such Circulars to the industry. The content of the Circulars is restricted for obvious reasons but has included advice on issues as divergent as Driver Cab Security and Station Searches. The Circulars have been issued to advise the railways industry on the measures required to safeguard members of the travelling public, staff and the UK's rail infrastructure itself, from terrorist attack.

Local Strategic Partnerships

Terry Rooney: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what the outcome is of the accreditation of local strategic partnerships in the areas due to receive neighbourhood renewal funds for 2002–03; and if he will make a statement.

Sally Keeble: I am pleased to announce that 87 out of 88 Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) in England's most deprived areas will today be accredited. LSPs bring together local authorities, public sector agencies, local people, the voluntary sector and business, to identify local priorities and implement strategies to meet them. They lead efforts to close the gap in living standards and opportunities between the most deprived neighbourhoods and other areas, and are key to delivery of the Government's National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal.
	Accreditation follows a process of self-assessment by LSPs and close working with Government Offices. It is only the first stage on the way to better local delivery and a number of partnerships have further work to do to ensure they are fully effective, inclusive and able to deliver better services on the ground. Government Offices will be writing to those LSPs setting out the areas of concern. They will continue to work with all LSPs to secure ongoing improvement, and we will monitor progress closely.
	Walsall LSP has not yet made sufficient progress against the criteria and is therefore not recommended for accreditation at this stage. This will be subject to review on 28 March. Where accreditation has been deferred, Neighbourhood Renewal Funds (NRF) will be maintained at 67 per cent. of the 2002–03 NRF rate (the same level as funding for 2001–02). As soon as the LSP has undergone a successful review with the relevant Government Office the remaining amounts will be released. Details of NRF allocations for every LSP for 2002/03 are attached.1
	1 Subject to the approval of the House of Commons.
	
		Neighbourhood Renewal Fund Allocations2
		
			 Local Authority Name NRF Allocation 2001–02 (£m) NRF Allocation 2002–03 (£m) NRF Allocation 2003–04 (£m) NRF Total Over 3 years (£m)  
		
		
			 Allerdale 0.428 0.642 0.855 1.925 
			 Ashfield 0.482 0.723 0.964 2.168 
			 Barking and Dagenham 0.816 1.225 1.633 3.673 
			 Barnsley 2.722 4.083 5.444 12.249 
			 Barrow-in- Furness 0.92 1.379 1.838 4.137 
			 Birmingham 11.022 16.533 22.043 49.598 
			 Blackburn with Darwen 2.168 3.251 4.335 9.754 
			 Blackpool 1.504 2.256 3.008 6.768 
			 Bolsover 0.734 1.102 1.469 3.305 
			 Bolton 2.712 4.069 5.426 12.207 
			 Bradford 4.906 7.359 9.812 22.077 
			 Brent 1.14 1.709 2.279 5.128 
			 Brighton & Hove 0.684 1.027 1.369 3.08 
			 Bristol 1.782 2.674 3.565 8.022 
			 Burnley 0.636 0.955 1.273 2.865 
			 Camden 2.11 3.164 4.219 9.492 
			 Coventry 2.644 3.967 5.290 11.901 
			 Croydon 0.29 0.436 0.581 1.307 
			 Derby 1.626 2.438 3.250 7.314 
			 Derwentside 0.742 1.112 1.482 3.336 
			 Doncaster 4.394 6.592 8.790 19.777 
			 Dudley 0.76 1.140 1.521 3.421 
			 Ealing 0.458 0.688 0.917 2.063 
			 Easington 2.216 3.325 4.433 9.975 
			 Enfield 0.93 1.395 1.860 4.184 
			 Gateshead 2.322 3.482 4.643 10.447 
			 Great Yarmouth 0.994 1.490 1.987 4.471 
			 Greenwich 1.94 2.911 3.881 8.733 
			 Hackney 5.882 8.824 11.765 26.472 
			 Halton 1.964 2.946 3.928 8.839 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 0.516 0.775 1.033 2.325 
			 Haringey 2.668 4.001 5.335 12.004 
			 Hartlepool 1.568 2.353 3.138 7.059 
			 Hastings 0.688 1.031 1.375 3.094 
			 Hyndburn 0.646 0.970 1.294 2.91 
			 Islington 3.136 4.703 6.270 14.108 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 0.54 0.811 1.081 2.431 
			 Kerrier 0.806 1.208 1.610 3.624 
			 Kingston upon Hull 3.754 5.630 7.507 16.892 
			 Kirklees 1.496 2.244 2.992 6.732 
			 Knowsley 3.696 5.543 7.391 16.63 
			 Lambeth 1.21 1.816 2.422 5.448 
			 Leeds 4.198 6.297 8.396 18.89 
			 Leicester 4.188 6.283 8.377 18.848 
			 Lewisham 1.226 1.839 2.453 5.518 
			 Lincoln 0.2 0.300 0.400 0.9 
			 Liverpool 10.066 15.100 20.133 45.298 
			 Luton 0.754 1.132 1.510 3.397 
			 Manchester 10.298 15.446 20.595 46.339 
			 Mansfield 1.15 1.724 2.299 5.172 
			 Middlesbrough 2.624 3.937 5.249 11.811 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 3.422 5.132 6.843 15.397 
			 Newham 6.666 9.999 13.332 29.997 
			 North Tyneside 1.536 2.305 3.074 6.915 
			 Nottingham 4.622 6.934 9.246 20.803 
			 Oldham 2.336 3.505 4.674 10.516 
			 Pendle 0.98 1.471 1.961 4.412 
			 Penwith 0.414 0.622 0.829 1.865 
			 Plymouth 1.058 1.586 2.114 4.757 
			 Portsmouth 0.478 0.717 0.957 2.152 
			 Preston 1.26 1.890 2.520 5.671 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 1.736 2.604 3.472 7.812 
			 Rochdale 2.438 3.658 4.878 10.975 
			 Rotherham 1.834 2.751 3.669 8.254 
			 Salford 2.72 4.081 5.441 12.242 
			 Sandwell 4.026 6.038 8.051 18.114 
			 Sedgefield 0.57 0.854 1.139 2.563 
			 Sefton 2.816 4.223 5.631 12.671 
			 Sheffield 4.79 7.186 9.581 2.557 
			 South Tyneside 2.692 4.037 5.382 12.11 
			 Southampton 0.43 0.646 0.862 1.939 
			 Southwark 3.956 5.934 7.912 17.803 
			 St Helens 1.936 2.905 3.873 8.714 
			 Stockton-on- Tees 1.926 2.889 3.852 8.667 
			 Stoke-on- Trent 2.016 3.025 4.034 9.075 
			 Sunderland 3.582 5.373 7.164 16.119 
			 Tameside 0.67 1.005 1.340 3.015 
			 Tower Hamlets 5.312 7.968 10.624 23.903 
			 Wakefield 2.22 3.329 4.439 9.989 
			 Walsall 3.56 5.341 7.122 16.024 
			 Waltham Forest 1.276 1.915 2.553 5.745 
			 Wandsworth 0.2 0.300 0.400 0.9 
			 Wansbeck 0.69 1.034 1.379 3.104 
			 Wear Valley 0.854 1.280 1.706 3.839 
			 Westminster 0.748 1.123 1.497 3.369 
			 Wigan 1.362 2.044 2.725 6.131 
			 Wirral 2.538 3.806 5.075 11.419 
			 Wolverhampton 2.964 4.446 5.928 13.339 
			 Totals 200.000 300.000 400.000 900.000 
		
	
	2 Subject to the approval of the House of Commons.

Local Strategic Partnerships

Gary Streeter: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what were the administrative costs of the South West Regional Development Agency in the past three years.

Alan Johnson: I have been asked to reply.
	The administrative costs for the SW RDA for the past two years were as follows. The figures for 2001–02 are not yet available.
	
		
			 Year Annual Review £000 (accruals outturn) 
		
		
			 1999–2000 8,326 
			 2000–01 8,523

Departmental Minutes

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will place in the Library the minutes from formal meetings which have taken place since 11 February between the Department's Permanent Secretary and (a) the Department's Director of Communications, (b) his own special adviser, (c) the Prime Minister and (d) the Prime Minister's Director of Communications and Strategy regarding (i) the role and conduct and (ii) the resignation of (A) the Department's Director of Communications and (B) his own special adviser; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Byers: Under Part II of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information it is not the practice to disclose details of internal meetings or communications. I refer the hon. Member to the statement I made on Tuesday 26 February to this House and that of Sir Richard Mottram, the Permanent Secretary of my Department, made on Monday 25 February, copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House.

Resignations

Andrew Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions 
	(1)  if he will list statements he made to the press about the departure of his Chief Press Officer Mr. Martin Sixsmith and at what time Mr. Sixsmith resigned;
	(2)  whether there was a link between the departure of his special adviser and that of his Chief Press Officer.

Stephen Byers: I refer to the Hon. Member to the statement I made on Tuesday 26 February to this House and that of Sir Richard Mottram, the Permanent Secretary of my Department made on Monday 25 February, copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House.

Resignations

Ann Widdecombe: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions whether he will resign.

Stephen Byers: No.

Resignations

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will list the time and date of meetings which have taken place since 11 February between the Department's Permanent Secretary and (a) the Department's Director of Communications, (b) his special adviser, (c) the Prime Minister and (d) the Prime Minister's Director of Communications and Strategy regarding (i) the role and conduct and (ii) the resignation of (A) the Department's Director of Communications and (B) his own special adviser.

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions 
	(1)  if he will place in the Library copies of correspondence since 11 February between himself and (a) the Department's Director of Communications, (b) his own special adviser, (c) the Prime Minister and (d) the Prime Minister's Director of Communications and Strategy regarding (i) the role and conduct and (ii) the resignation of (A) the Department's Director of Communications and (B) his own special adviser; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  if he will place in the Library copies of correspondence between himself and his Permanent Secretary since 11 February regarding (a) the role and conduct of the Department's Director of Communications, (b) the role and conduct of his own special adviser and (c) the resignation of (i) the Department's Director of Communications and (ii) his own special adviser; and if he will make a statement.

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will list the time and date of meetings which have taken place since 11 February between himself and (a) the Department's Permanent Secretary, (b) the Department's Director of Communications, (c) his own special adviser, (d) the Prime Minister and (e) the Prime Minister's Director of Communications and Strategy regarding (i) the role and conduct and (ii) the resignation of (A) the Department's Director of Communications and (B) his own special adviser.

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will place in the Library the minutes from formal meetings which have taken place since 11 February between himself and (a) the Department's Permanent Secretary, (b) the Department's Director of Communications, (c) his own special adviser, (d) the Prime Minister and (e) the Prime Minister's Director of Communications and Strategy regarding (i) the role and conduct and (ii) the resignation of (A) the Department's Director of Communications and (B) his own special adviser; and if he will make a statement.

Stephen Byers: Under Part II of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information it is not the practice to disclose details of internal meetings or communications. I refer the hon. Member to the statement I made on 26 February 2002, Official Report, columns 563–65 and that of Sir Richard Mottram, the Permanent Secretary of my Department, made on Monday 25 February, copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House.

Resignations

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will 
	(1)  make a statement on the timetable of events corresponding to the resignation from his Department on 15 February of (a) the DTLR Director of Communications and (b) his own special adviser.
	(2)  state the date and time at which (a) he and (b) his Department's Permanent Secretary accepted (i) a letter and (ii) verbal notice of resignation from his Department from (A) the Department's Director of Communications and (b) his own special adviser.

Stephen Byers: I refer the Hon. Member to the statement I made on 26 February 2002, Official Report, columns 563–65 and that of Sir Richard Mottram, the Permanent Secretary of my Department, made on Monday 25 February, copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House.

Resignations

Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will place in the Library the letters of resignation from this Department from (a) the Department's Director of Communications and (b) his own special adviser received on or after 15 February.

Stephen Byers: I refer the hon. Member to the statement Sir Richard Mottram, the Permanent Secretary for my Department, made on Monday 25 February, copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House.

SOLICITOR-GENERAL

CPS (Case Numbers)

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Solicitor-General how many cases were handled by each lawyer per year, in each region, since the inception of the CPS; and of these cases how many were cases for the (a) magistrates' court and (b) Crown court, expressed as a percentage of total cases and as an absolute figure.

Harriet Harman: holding answer 14 February 2002
	It is not possible to provide information about the numbers of cases handled by lawyers since the inception of the CPS in 1986 without incurring disproportionate costs.
	The tables show absolute and percentage figures of finalised cases for each year since April 1999 when the CPS restructured into 42 Areas. The tables also show the toal number of cases finalised by court type for each financial year, the number of lawyers in post at 30 September (the midpoint of each financial year) as well as the number of cases notionally handled by each lawyer.
	
		CPS Cases by Court Type and by Lawyer -- 1999–2000
		
			  Cases finalised by Court Type  
			  Lawyers @ 30.9.1999 Crown % of total Per lawyer Magistrates % of total Per lawyer Total Per lawyer 
		
		
			 42 Areas 1,769.4 124,348 7.98 70 1,434,194 92.02 811 1,558,612 881 
			 P01—Avon & Somerset 44.3 3,289 0.21 74 37,025 91.67 836 40,388 912 
			 P02—Bedfordshire 17.0 1,052 0.07 62 11,652 91.27 685 12,766 751 
			 P03—Cambridgeshire 16.1 1,444 0.09 90 17,772 92.06 1,104 19,306 1,199 
			 P04—Cheshire 31.5 2,258 0.14 72 23,297 90.91 739 25,627 813 
			 P06—Cleveland 23.5 1,748 0.11 74 21,255 92.10 905 23,077 983 
			 P07—Cumbria 21.4 983 0.06 46 16,362 94.08 764 17,391 812 
			 P08—Derbyshire 29.6 2,404 0.15 81 29,990 89.41 708 23,475 792 
			 P09—Devon & Cornwall 37.4 2,545 0.16 68 30,369 92.08 812 32,982 882 
			 P10—Dorset 15.3 1,257 0.08 82 13,713 91.10 896 15,052 984 
			 P11—Durham 19.0 1,434 0.09 75 18,888 92.60 994 20,397 1,074 
			 P12—Dyfed-Powys 15.8 848 0.05 54 15,190 94.40 961 16,092 1,018 
			 P13—Essex 36.4 2,936 0.19 81 29,236 90.65 803 32,253 886 
			 P14—Gloucestershire 15.4 975 0.06 63 16,568 94.10 1.074 17,606 1,142 
			 P15—Greater Manchester 117.7 7,600 0.49 65 97,430 92.71 828 105,095 893 
			 P16—Gwent 23.5 1,514 0.10 64 20,370 92.81 867 21,948 934 
			 P17—Hampshire 50.7 4,181 0.27 82 43,333 91.04 854 47,596 938 
			 P18—Hertfordshire 24.8 1,676 0.11 68 18,813 91.52 758 20,557 829 
			 P19—Humberside 26.9 2,140 0.14 79 24,212 91.60 899 26,431 981 
			 P20—Kent 39.7 3,037 0.19 77 35,507 91.94 895 38,621 974 
			 P21—Lancashire 66.8 4,169 0.27 62 60,378 93.45 904 64,609 967 
			 P22—Leicestershire 26.9 2,320 0.15 86 23,497 90.71 872 25,903 962 
			 P23—Lincolnshire 18.9 918 0.06 49 15,674 94.19 830 16,641 881 
			 P24—Merseyside 68.2 4,122 0.26 60 49,422 92.20 724 53,604 786 
			 P25—Metropolitan & City 265.2 18,484 1.19 70 175,372 90.43 661 193,925 731 
			 P26—Norfolk 24.4 1,492 0.10 61 19,607 92.66 802 21,160 886 
			 P27—Northamptonshire 14.4 1,334 0.09 93 14,118 90.82 982 15,545 1,082 
			 P28—Northumbria 62.4 4,194 0.27 67 5,498 92.87 889 59,759 958 
			 P29—North Wales 27.1 1,062 0.07 39 18,584 94.41 685 19,685 726 
			 P30—North Yorkshire 23.0 1,391 0.09 60 19,134 92.95 830 20,585 893 
			 P31—Nottinghamshire 47.2 3,856 0.25 82 31,089 88.76 658 35,027 741 
			 P32—South Wales 59.2 3,919 0.25 66 45,594 92.12 787 59,579 855 
			 P33—South Yorkshire 43.6 4,424 0.28 101 38,181 89.40 875 42,706 979 
			 P34—Staffordshire 36.5 2,407 0.15 66 32,325 92.89 887 34,798 955 
			 P35—Suffolk 17.6 1,298 0.08 74 13,827 90.97 786 15,199 864 
			 P36—Surrey 22.1 1,082 0.07 49 17,850 94.04 809 18,982 860 
			 P37—Sussex 37.4 2,275 0.15 61 28,458 92.41 762 30,794 824 
			 P38—Thames Valley 53.0 2,479 0.16 47 43,403 94.50 819 45,929 866 
			 P39—Warwickshire 12.0 695 0.04 58 9,258 92.48 770 10,011 832 
			 P40—West Mercia 32.6 1,850 0.12 57 26,982 93.40 826 28,889 885 
			 P41—West Midlands 102.2 8,404 0.54 82 83,135 90.74 813 91,621 896 
			 P42—West Yorkshire 86.4 8,109 0.52 94 85,817 91.28 993 94,020 1,088 
			 P43—Wiltshire 16.0 743 0.05 46 14,009 94.67 876 14,798 925 
		
	
	
		CPS Cases by Court Type and by Lawyer -- 2000–01
		
			  Cases finalised by Court Type  
			  Lawyers @ 30.9.2000 Crown % of total Per lawyer Magistrates % of total Per lawyer Total Per lawyer 
		
		
			 42 Areas 1,739.8 115,732 7.87 67 1,354,713 92.13 779 1,470,445 845 
			 P01—Avon & Somerset 41.0 2,961 0.20 72 32,032 91.54 781 34,993 854 
			 P02—Bedfordshire 16.0 960 0.07 60 10,787 91.83 674 11,747 734 
			 P03—Cambridgeshire 17.8 1,363 0.09 76 13,073 90.56 734 14,436 810 
			 P04—Cheshire 30.2 3,149 0.15 71 23,089 91.49 764 25,238 835 
			 P06—Cleveland 21.8 1,746 0.12 80 20,107 92.01 922 21,853 1,002 
			 P07—Cumbria 23.0 1,170 0.08 51 13,848 92.21 601 15,018 652 
			 P08—Derbyshire 26.2 2,487 0.17 95 19,459 88.67 744 21,946 839 
			 P09—Devon & Cornwall 36.9 2,193 0.15 59 29,033 92.98 787 31,226 846 
			 P10—Dorset 14.0 1,069 0.07 76 13,959 92.89 998 15,028 1,075 
			 P11—Durham 22.0 1,285 0.09 58 15,778 92.47 716 17,063 774 
			 P12—Dyfed-Powys 19.4 722 0.05 37 13,660 94.98 703 14,382 741 
			 P13—Essex 34.8 2,261 0.15 65 25,625 91.89 736 27,886 801 
			 P14—Gloucestershire 15.4 763 0.05 49 14,342 94.95 930 15,105 980 
			 P15—Greater Manchester 117.5 7,426 0.51 63 93,291 92.63 794 100,717 857 
			 P16—Gwent 22.5 1,266 0.09 56 21,529 94.45 957 22,795 1,013 
			 P17—Hampshire 49.5 3,975 0.27 80 43,277 91.59 875 47,252 955 
			 P18—Hertfordshire 22.8 1,460 0.10 64 19,344 92.98 847 20,804 911 
			 P19—Humberside 28.6 1,877 0.13 66 22,942 92.44 801 24,819 867 
			 P20—Kent 39.8 2,948 0.20 74 32,160 91.60 809 35,108 883 
			 P21—Lancashire 60.8 3,908 0.27 64 57,800 93.67 951 61,708 1,015 
			 P22—Leicestershire 28.0 2,183 0.15 78 22,400 91.12 799 24,583 877 
			 P23—Lincolnshire 18.3 961 0.07 53 15,829 94.28 866 16,790 919 
			 P24—Merseyside 67.6 4,301 0.29 64 48,467 91.85 717 52,768 781 
			 P25—Metropolitan & City 252.6 17,014 1.16 67 162,316 90.51 643 179,330 710 
			 P26—Norfolk 22.8 1,415 0.10 62 18,245 92.80 799 19,660 861 
			 P27—Northamptonshire 16.6 1,089 0.07 66 15,532 93.45 935 16,621 1,000 
			 P28—Northumbria 68.0 3,948 0.27 58 53,527 93.13 788 57,475 846 
			 P29—North Wales 24.3 1,089 0.07 45 17,059 94.00 701 18,148 746 
			 P30—North Yorkshire 23.5 1,351 0.09 57 15,774 92.11 671 17,125 728 
			 P31—Nottinghamshire 44.0 3,242 0.22 74 31,185 90.58 709 34,427 782 
			 P32—South Wales 58.8 3,306 0.22 56 46,641 93.38 793 49,947 849 
			 P33—South Yorkshire 45.7 4,244 0.29 93 36,531 89.59 800 40,775 893 
			 P34—Staffordshire 33.6 2,235 0.15 66 28,810 92.80 856 31,045 923 
			 P35—Suffolk 16.6 1,058 0.07 64 12,692 92.31 764 13,750 827 
			 P36—Surrey 17.6 963 0.07 55 15,265 94.07 866 16,228 921 
			 P37—Sussex 35.6 2,329 0.16 65 27,220 92.12 764 29,549 829 
			 P38—Thames Valley 50.1 2,348 0.16 47 38,010 94.18 759 40,358 806 
			 P39—Warwickshire 12.0 602 0.04 50 8,935 93.69 743 9,537 793 
			 P40—West Mercia 30.8 1,933 0.13 63 27,569 93.45 896 29,502 959 
			 P41—West Midlands 107.9 8,925 0.61 83 82,839 90.27 768 91,764 851 
			 P42—West Yorkshire 89.1 6,565 0.45 74 81,482 92.54 914 88,047 988 
			 P43—Wiltshire 16.0 642 0.04 40 13,250 95.38 828 13,892 868 
		
	
	
		CPS Cases by Court Type and by Lawyer -- 2001–02 (to December 2001 only)
		
			  Cases finalised by Court Type  
			  Lawyers @ 30.9.2001 Crown % of total Per lawyer Magistrates % of total Per lawyer Total Per lawyer 
		
		
			 42 Areas 1,817.6 83,417 7.65 46 1,006,595 92.35 554 1,090,012 600 
			 P01—Avon & Somerset 48.4 1,907 0.17 39 22,435 92.17 463 24,342 503 
			 P02—Bedfordshire 16.8 664 0.06 39 8,626 92.85 513 9,290 552 
			 P03—Cambridgeshire 18.8 954 0.09 51 9,086 90.50 483 10,040 533 
			 P04—Cheshire 37.0 1,401 0.13 38 15,697 91.81 424 17,098 462 
			 P06—Cleveland 22.9 1,435 0.13 63 15,683 91.62 684 17,118 747 
			 P07—Cumbria 22.4 821 0.08 37 10,365 92.66 462 11,186 499 
			 P08—Derbyshire 27.7 1,854 0.17 67 14,667 88.78 530 16,521 597 
			 P09—Devon & Cornwall 39.1 1,684 0.15 43 19,291 91.97 493 20,975 536 
			 P10—Dorset 17.0 664 0.06 39 9,414 93.41 554 10,078 594 
			 P11—Durham 24.1 1,177 0.11 49 11,818 90.94 491 12,995 540 
			 P12—Dyfed Powys 21.4 569 0.05 27 9,853 94.54 460 10,422 487 
			 P13—Essex 39.6 1,477 0.14 37 19,306 92.89 487 20,783 524 
			 P14—Gloucestershire 16.2 608 0.06 37 11,057 94.79 681 11,665 719 
			 P15—Greater Manchester 120.6 5,376 0.49 45 68,580 92.73 569 73,956 613 
			 P16—Gwent 28.3 1,016 0.09 36 14,590 93.49 515 15,606 551 
			 P17—Hampshire 48.7 2,623 0.24 54 28,112 91.47 577 30,735 631 
			 P18—Hertfordshire 25.0 1,246 0.11 50 14,633 92.15 584 15,879 634 
			 P19—Humberside 28.8 1,356 0.12 47 16,627 92.46 577 17,983 624 
			 P20—Kent 45.8 1,965 0.18 43 23,563 92.30 514 25,528 557 
			 P21—Lancashire 67.9 2,979 0.27 44 39,455 92.98 581 42,434 625 
			 P22—Leicestershire 28.7 1,560 0.14 54 16,989 91.59 591 18,549 645 
			 P23—Lincolnshire 16.2 610 0.06 38 14,690 96.01 909 15,300 947 
			 P24—Merseyside 68.7 3,344 0.31 49 30,972 90.26 451 34,316 500 
			 P25—Metropolitan & City 247.3 12,923 1.19 52 125,398 90.66 507 138,321 559 
			 P26—Norfolk 24.2 891 0.08 37 13,635 93.87 564 14,526 600 
			 P27—Northamptonshire 17.8 670 0.06 38 11,738 94.60 661 12,408 698 
			 P28—Northumbria 69.5 2,842 0.26 41 38,390 93.11 552 41,232 593 
			 P29—North Wales 21.4 810 0.07 38 13,011 94.14 609 13,821 647 
			 P30—North Yorkshire 22.8 758 0.07 33 11,212 93.67 492 11,970 526 
			 P31—Nottinghamshire 47.2 2,259 0.21 48 20,730 90.17 439 22,989 487 
			 P32—South Wales 62.2 2,654 0.24 43 32,414 92.43 521 35,068 563 
			 P33—South Yorkshire 41.7 3,351 0.31 80 26,703 88.85 640 30,054 720 
			 P34—Staffordshire 35.5 1,405 0.13 40 19,907 93.41 561 21,312 600 
			 P35—Suffolk 20.0 691 0.06 34 9,683 93.34 483 10,374 518 
			 P36—Surrey 18.8 841 0.08 45 12,173 93.54 647 13,014 691 
			 P37—Sussex 40.0 1,842 0.17 46 20,134 91.62 504 21,976 550 
			 P38—Thames Valley 54.3 1,682 0.15 31 42,047 96.15 774 43,729 805 
			 P39—Warwickshire 10.0 457 0.04 46 7,232 94.06 721 7,689 767 
			 P40—West Mercia 32.7 1,286 0.12 39 20,764 94.17 634 22,050 673 
			 P41—West Midlands 111.4 6,510 0.60 58 64,898 90.88 582 71,408 641 
			 P42—West Yorkshire 92.0 3,800 0.35 41 60,612 94.10 659 64,412 700 
			 P43—Wiltshire 18.2 455 0.04 25 10,405 95.81 572 10,860 597

Legal Staff (Professional Development)

Claire Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Solicitor-General if there is a mandatory requirement for legal staff to participate in a continuing professional development programme.

Harriet Harman: holding answer 14 February 2002
	Yes, lawyers in the CPS are required to undertake continuous professional development (CPD) according to the requirements laid down by their particular professional body, either the Law Society or the Bar Council. The requirement exists by virtue of the individual's professional status, not their employment with the CPS. All solicitors and barristers employed by CPS are provided with adequate opportunities to satisfy the CPD requirements of their professional bodies. Many lawyers annually exceed the requirements for CPD.
	CPS is authorised to accredit CPD for in-house courses based on guidelines laid down by the Law Society and the Bar Council.
	In addition to the requirements of the professional bodies, it is mandatory for CPS lawyers to attend the following in house courses:
	Induction for new lawyers
	Direct Communication with Victims
	European Court of Human Rights training
	Diversity Awareness
	Advocacy Skills training
	Each year the CPS produces a National Training Plan, this specifies the mandatory training to be undertaken by staff to meet the requirements of new legislation and internal initiatives, this year these include the Proceeds of Crime and Racially Aggravated Crime.
	Specialist areas are also supported by mandatory training. CPS lawyers undertake training to prepare them for casework in areas such as Youth Offenders, Child Abuse, and Speaking Up for Justice.

CULTURE MEDIA AND SPORT

Hyde Park

Mark Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport 
	(1)  how many paying concerts and other events were held in Hyde Park in (a) 1999, (b) 2000 and (c) 2001;
	(2)  how much the paying concerts and other events held in Hyde Park raised as a contribution to the running costs of the Royal Parks in (a) 1999, (b) 2000 and (c) 2001, net of the costs of repairing damage to the parks caused by the events;
	(3)  how many paying concerts and other events are planned for (a) 2002, (b) 2003 and (c) 2004 in Hyde Park;
	(4)  how much of the revenue raised by paying concerts and other events in Hyde Park is spent on Hyde Park itself.

Richard Caborn: Responsibility for the subject of these questions has been delegated to the Royal Parks Agency and I have asked its Chief Executive, William Weston to reply.
	Letter from William Weston to Mr. Mark Field, dated 28 February 2002
	I have been asked by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport to reply to your Parliamentary Questions about concerts and other events in the Royal Parks, as this is an operational matter which has been delegated to the Royal Parks Agency.
	In 1999 ten large events were held in Hyde Park, raising £538,216 towards the Agency's running costs; in 2000 eight large events were held, raising £586,021; and in 2001 fourteen such events raised £1,085,000. These figures are net of the cost of repairing damage to the parks caused by the events.
	All income raised by the Agency is taken into consideration when expenditure budgets are allocated to individual parks. Revenue is not allocated specifically to the park or section that raised it.
	We are contractually committed to hold thirteen large events in Hyde Park in 2002 and to staging the Prince's Trust concert in 2003. The Prince's Trust concert is the only event planned as yet for future years.

National Lottery

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what funds each of the National Lottery Distribution Funds hold which are allocated but not yet distributed.

Richard Caborn: There is one National Lottery Distribution Fund (NLDF) and all the money held in it is allocated to the distributing bodies. The table shows the amount held in the NLDF for each distributor, but not drawn down at 31 December 2001—in other words its NLDF balance; and the amount committed by each distributor, but not yet paid out to project operators, at the same date.
	
		
			 Distributing Body Amount held in NLDF at 31 December 2001 (£m) Balance of outstanding commitments (£m) 
		
		
			 Arts Council of England 244,418,707 260,629,000 
			 Film Council 58,506,013 57,395,466 
			 Arts Council of Northern Ireland 32,790,612 18,900,264 
			 Scottish Arts Council 45,528,808 33,167,092 
			 Arts Council of Wales 30,786,187 36,891,097 
			 Community Fund 408,038,972 543,131,065 
			 Heritage Lottery Fund 981,827,570 1,031,160,453 
			 Millennium Commission 420,980,083 266,400,000 
			 New Opportunities Fund 748,502,904 789,421,108 
			 Sports Council (England) 415,561,569 633,627,000 
			 Sports Council for Northern Ireland 18,510,607 14,593,783 
			 Scottish Sports Council 74,968,465 50,557,408 
			 UK Sports Council 6,303,404 50,291,164 
			 Sports Council of Wales 39,230,023 28,886,605 
			 Scottish Screen 3,817,547 4,768,403 
			  
			  3,529,771,471 3,819,819,908

Departmental Buildings

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many buildings her Department operates; how many people work in each of those buildings; what the cost of maintaining each building has been in each of the past seven years; what plans her Department has to move from those buildings in the next two years; and if she will make a statement.

Richard Caborn: The Department for Culture, Media and Sport occupies and manages four buildings and has done so only since 1999. Maintenance costs of buildings occupied before occupation of present buildings have been handed over to present occupants. The four buildings currently occupied are all in central London and are:
	
		
			 Building Occupancy 
		
		
			 Trafalgar Place (SW1) 344 
			 Oceanic House (SW1) 103 
			 Grove House (WC2) 94 
			 Queens Yard (W1) 14 
		
	
	A small number of staff are also located in buildings occupied by other Government Departments as a result of Machinery of Government changes following the 2001 General Election, there being insufficient room in the four buildings named above for them to be absorbed.
	Maintenance costs are very similar from year to year except where major plant or building works are required.
	
		
			  1998 1999 2000 2001 
			  £000 £000 £000 £000 
		
		
			 Trafalgar Place 343.3 353.1 372.2 332.7 
			 Oceanic House 0 *92.0 63.5 81.2 
			 Grove House 148.2 147.1 166.5 138.6 
			 Queen's Yard 0 *28.0 131.7 101.5 
		
	
	* occupancy began = part year only.
	There are no plans at present to move existing staff from these buildings.

Sport England

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when the Sport England accounts will be laid before the House.

Richard Caborn: Sport England's Lottery accounts were laid before the House by the Comptroller and Auditor General on 25 February and its Exchequer accounts were laid before the House by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on 26 February.

Television Signals

Nick Harvey: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many homes, per constituency, in each of the last seven years have been unable to receive (a) digital terrestrial, (b) digital satellite, (c) cable and (d) none of those television signals because of their geography; how many have been unable to receive analogue television signals; and if she will make a statement.

Richard Caborn: This information could be provided only at disproportionate cost. For details of current digital television coverage, I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for South Suffolk (Mr. Yeo) on 6 December 2001, Official Report, column 502W, by my hon. Friend the Minister for Tourism, Film and Broadcasting. Further information on digital terrestrial television coverage, based on individual post codes, is available on the Digital Television Group website: www.dtg.org.uk.

Catering Services

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the cost was of (a) in-house canteen and (b) other catering services provided by her Department in each of the last four years.

Richard Caborn: The Department for Culture, Media and Sport opened a staff restaurant on 2 April 2001. Prior to that time only hospitality for meetings, in the form of hot drinks and biscuits, which combined with a vending contract, was provided at a cost of about £18,000 for each year. The predicted revenue cost of the staff restaurant on completion of 12 months operation is about £62,000 (this includes an element of start-up costs).

Equipment Leasing

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will list the equipment leasing arrangements entered into by her Department in each of the last four years; and what the cost to public funds in each case is.

Richard Caborn: Equipment leasing in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, is limited to photocopiers. The contract was entered into in 2000 for a term of three years at fixed costs of £74,277 per annum inclusive of maintenance.

Advertising

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will list the publicity and advertising campaigns run by her Department in each of the last four years, specifying the (a) purpose, (b) cost to public funds, (c) number of staff involved and (d) method of evaluation in each case.

Richard Caborn: The Department has run no publicity or advertising campaigns in the last four years.

Special Advisers

Tim Collins: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on how many occasions since 1 May 1997 (a) departmental and (b) non-departmental (special advisers have travelled abroad in an official capacity; and if she will list the total cost, including (i) travel, (ii) accommodation and (iii) subsistence allowance, for each occasion.

Richard Caborn: holding answer 27 February 2002
	Between 1 April 2000 and 31 March 2001, special advisers in this Department travelled overseas on official business on four occasions; to Venice (Italy), Berlin (Germany) and Apeldoorn and Haarlem (Netherlands); at an average cost of £232 per visit. Information for the period 2 May 1997 to 31 March 2000 is already in the public domain. All travel by special advisers is undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Ministerial Code and the Civil Service Management Code.

Special Urgency Provisions

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how often the Department has applied the special urgency provisions in paragraph 22 of Circular 18/84 (Development by Government Departments) to a development by the department; and if she will make a statement.

Richard Caborn: There is no record of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport having any direct involvement in any relevant development.

Broadcasting Costs

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will make an assessment of the costs to public service broadcasters of broadcasting channels via (a) digital satellite television, (b) digital terrestrial television and (c) digital cable television.

Richard Caborn: The costs of broadcasting television channels on each platform are a matter for the individual broadcasters and transmission companies concerned and are commercially confidential. However, approximate costs of the changes necessary at the transmission sites to deliver Digital Terrestrial Television (provided by the Independent Television Commission) are set out in the consultation document, Digital Television: The Principles for Spectrum Planning, published on 11 December 2001, copies of which are in the libraries of both Houses and on the website: www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk.

Free-to-Air Channels

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport which free-to-air channels are available to consumers receiving their television via (a) digital satellite, (b) digital terrestrial and (c) digital cable.

Richard Caborn: The free-to-view channels available on both Digital Terrestrial and Digital Satellite are:
	BBC1
	BBC 2
	BBC Choice
	BBC 4
	BBC News 24
	BBC Parliament (Audio Only)
	CBBC
	Cbeebies
	Channel 4
	Channel 5
	ITN News Channel
	S4C (In Wales)
	S4C 2 (In Wales)
	These channels are offered to cable operators for inclusion in their basic digital cable subscription packages.
	Free-to-view digital terrestrial also offers ITV2, (UTV2 in Ireland), Tele G (in Scotland) and a full range of National and Regional channels.
	Free-to-view digital satellite also offers more than 20 further channels and over 40 radio services.

Electronic Programme Guides

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will make a statement on the regulations regarding access to the electronic programme guides on (a) digital satellite, (b) digital terrestrial and (c) digital cable.

Richard Caborn: Third party access to electronic programme guides (EPGs) is regulated in accordance with relevant provisions in the licences for satellite EPGs (satellite television service licenses) digital terrestrial EPGs (digital additional service licences) and for cable services (local delivery licences).
	Each of these licences requires the licensee not to engage in any practice or enter into any arrangement which is prejudicial to fair and effective competition in the provision of the licensed service and services connected with them, and to comply with any direction, code or guideline issued by the ITC for this purpose.
	Following consultation with Oftel (which has responsibilities where an EPG is an integral part of a conditional access system) and broadcasters, the ITC published a code in 1997 providing further guidance. Amongst other things, the code requires EPG providers not to discriminate between free-to-air and pay television services, to provide due prominence to public service channels, and to ensure that any agreement with other broadcasters is made on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms.
	Oftel also have powers to regulate Conditional Access Systems for fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory access for third parties. This applies to the Sky EPG on the Dsat platform.

Grassroots Sports

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what funding she has given to grassroots sports in each constituency since 1992; what the most recent annual figure is; and if she will make a statement on her plans for the future of the development of grassroots sports with particular reference to South-East Cornwall constituency.

Richard Caborn: I am arranging for the figures for Sport England's Lottery Community Fund and Sportsmatch funding, broken down by constituency, since 1992 and in the last available financial year, to be placed in the Libraries of both Houses. It is not possible for Sport England to break down their exchequer funding distribution by constituency, and it is not possible for the Football Foundation to provide a breakdown of its funding by constituency. The Government's plans for the development of sport at all levels are set out in the documents XA Sporting Future For All" and XThe Government's Plan for Sport."

External Contracts

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport which non-accounting and non-information technology external organisations which previously held contracts with her Department (a) won new contracts at the culmination of the existing contracts and (b) won new contracts after a period of inactivity with her Department in each of the past five years.

Richard Caborn: All service contracts let by the Department were subsequently subjected to competitive tender and, in each case, awarded to different companies. No contracts have been re-won during the time that the Department has been in existence.

External Contracts

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport which non-accounting and non-information technology external organisations have won new contracts with (a) her Department and (b) executive agencies in each of the past five years.

Richard Caborn: The only contract outside the activities set out, is that for Facilities Management provision awarded to WSP Facilities Management, part of the WSP Group, in October 1999 for a period of five years. The Department has used the central framework contract with Capita for recruitment advisory services.

External Contracts

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will list the 30 largest contacts awarded by her Department from (a) May 1997 to April 1998, (b) May 1998 to April 1999, (c) May 1999 to April 2000, (d) May 2000 to April 2001 and (e) May 2001 to the latest date, indicating in each case the values of the contracts and the companies with which the contracts were placed.

Richard Caborn: The full list of awarded contracts is as follows:
	
		
			 Company 1997–98 1998–99 1999–2000 2000–01 2001–02 
		
		
			 Schlumberger* Sema * 0 0 £1.5 million £1.5 million 
			 PWC Nil Nil Nil 83,000 (2) 96,000 (1) 
			 KPMG Nil 23,000 (1) Nil Nil Nil 
			 WSP FM Nil Nil 93,000 153,000 153,000 
			 WS Atkins Nil 55,000 (3) 33,000 (2) Nil Nil 
			 Deloitte & Touche 109,000 (2) 207,000 (1) Nil Nil Nil 
			 Capita Nil 39,000 (3) Nil Nil 26,000 ** 
			 Pitney Bowes Management Services Nil 1.4 million over five years Nil Nil Nil 
			 First Security Nil 1.5 million over five years Nil Nil Nil 
		
	
	* XSchlumbergerSema have been the Department's outsourced IT service provider since 1993. It is not possible to provide a breakdown of fees annually from 1997–98 but the payment to SchlumbergerSema for direct services was of the order of £1.5 million in 2000–01 and will be a similar figure in 2001–02. Expenditure in previous years will not have exceeded that amount.".
	** Recruitment services utilising central government framework contract.
	Includes Royal Parks Agency
	Number of contacts in brackets

Community Buy-outs

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the capital cost of each community buy-out has been since 1994, and if she will list awards to assist in community buy-outs from the new opportunities Fund's Scottish Land Fund that have been awarded since February 2001.

Richard Caborn: Since February 2001 the Scottish Land Fund has awarded a total of 41 grants to date totalling £4,661,243. Of these, 17 have been for acquisition purposes totalling £4,084,613.
	The following table gives further details of all awards made to date.
	
		Scottish Land Fund Grants to Date
		
			 Meeting Date Local Authority Applicant Grant Type Amount £ Monthly Totals £ 
		
		
			 April 2001 Highland Highland Kinlochleven Land Development Trust Laggan Forest Trust Co Ltd Development Development 90,000 73,172 April 163,172 
			 May 2001 Moray Highland Perth and Kinross Aberdeenshire Deskford Community Association Fernaig Community Trust Comrie Millennium Footpath Association Windyhills Community Group Acquisition Development Technical Assistance Technical Assistance 12,000 57,796 4,381 9,415 May 83,592 
			 July 2001 Argyll and Bute Argyll and Bute Eilean Siar Moray Ross of Mull Historical Centre Mull and Iona Community Trust Port of Ness Harbour Ltd Burghead Amenities Project Acquistion Acquistion Acquisition Acquisition 52,907 33,268 4,168 19,108 July 109,451 
			 August 2001 Highland Highland Argyll and Bute Aberdeenshire Highland Highland Scottish Borders Argyll and Bute Abriachian Forest Trust Durness Development Group Tiree Rural Development Company Woodhead & Windyhills Community Group Glen Beag Woodland Steering Group Balmacara Square Management Committee Gordon Community Woodland Association Kilchoman Community Group Development Acquisition Development Acquisition Technical Assistance Technical Assistance Technical Assistance Technical Assistance 94,000 15,670 50,000 90,000 300 964 720 1,536 August 253,190 
			 September 2001 Highland Highland South Ayrshire Argyll and Bute Isle of Eigg Heritage Trust Isle of Eigg Heritage Trust Ballantrae Rural Initiative Care in the Community Gigha Land Steering Community Group Technical Assistance Development Acquisition Technical Assistance 3,375 20,310 26,690 2.974 September 53,349 
			 October 2001 Highland Highland Argyll and Bute Highland Isle of Eigg Heritage Trust Kells Croft Steering Group Gigha Land Steering Community Group Fernaig Community Trust Development Acquisition Acquisition Acquisition 62,519 12,475 3,525,000 11,873 October 3,611,867 
			 November 2001 Highland Renfrewshire Argyll and Bute Aberdeenshire Aberdeenshire Stirling Highland Renfrewshire Highland Acharacle Community Company Howwood Community Woodland Group Iomairt Chille-Choman Mid Deeside Limited Mid Deeside Limited Trossachs Community Trust North Sutherland Community Woodland Trust Howwood Community Woodland Group Strathnairn Community Woodland Project Acquisition Acquisition Acquisition Technical Assistance Technical Assistance Acquisition Technical Assistance Technical Assistance Technical Assistance 96,420 13,870 30,358 3,665 4,350 20,000 1,491 485 1,151  November 171,790 
			 January 2002 Inverness & Nairn Tayside Grampian Borders Orkney Argyll & the Islands Distillery Wood Association Highland Perthshire Communities Land Trust Strichen Community Park Gordon Community Woodland Association North Ronaldsay Trust Isle of Gigha Heritage Trust Technical Assistance Technical Assistance Technical Assistance Acquisition Acquisition Development 940 2,910 176 69,971 50,835 90,000 January 214,832 
			  
			 Total4,661,243

Stadiums

Shaun Woodward: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much funding has been made available (a) from her Department and (b) from the National Lottery, for assisting in capital building projects for (i) football stadiums and (ii) rugby league stadiums in (A) 1999, (B) 2000 and (C) 2001.

Richard Caborn: The information is as follows:
	
		£ 
		
			 Sport Year National Lottery Football Foundation 
		
		
			 Football 1999 1120,000,000 11,750,000 
			  2000 292,000,000 17,855,000 
			  2001 — 16,274,000 
			 Rugby League 1999 — — 
			  2000 — — 
			  2001 312,142 — 
		
	
	1 All of this funding is for the English National Stadium.
	2 This funding is for the Commonwealth Games Venue at Manchester SportCity which will eventually become the home ground for Manchester City FC.

Targeted Lottery Initiative

Tom Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will give details of the English areas which will benefit from the targeted Lottery initiative she announced on 27 June 2001; and if she will indicate how these areas were chosen.

Tessa Jowell: The Community Fund and the New Opportunities Fund have selected 51 areas in England to benefit from the initiative. These are Ashfield, Barking & Dagenham, Barnsley, Basildon, Blackpool, Blyth Valley, Bolsover, Bolton, Bournemouth, Brent, Burnley, Darlington, Derby, Doncaster, Dudley, Ellesmere Port and Neston, Enfield, Great Yarmouth, Hyndburn, Kingston upon Hull, Kirklees, Knowsley, Luton, North East Lincolnshire, North Somerset, Oldham, Pendle, Peterborough, Portsmouth, Rochdale, Rotherham, Salford, Sandwell, Sefton, Solihull, St. Helens, Stockton-on-Tees, Swindon, Tameside, Telford and Wrekin, Tendring, Thanet, Trafford, Wakefield, Walsall, Waltham Forest, Wansbeck, Waveney, West Lancashire, Wigan and Wirral.
	The criteria I announced for the scheme were that areas should be both deprived and have received less lottery funding than other parts of the country. To select the English Fair Share areas, the two distributors have analysed which of the 100 most deprived local authority districts have received less than average funding from the Community Fund and which have received less than average funding from the other Lottery distributors collectively. Areas that have received less than average funding from either the Community Fund or from the other Distributors collectively will receive direct support from Fair Share.
	The Fair Share initiative is one of several targeted initiatives operated by the Lottery distributors. Government will continue to encourage distributors to ensure that parts of the country benefit from Lottery funding.

Art Exports

Tony Colman: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when the 2000–01 Annual report of the Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art will be published.

Kim Howells: The Reviewing Committee's Annual Report for 2000–01 has been published today and copies have been laid before Parliament.

EDUCATION AND SKILLS

Enron

Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what meetings (a) she and (b) her senior departmental officials have had with Enron and its subsidiaries in the last two years.

Ivan Lewis: Ministers and civil servants meet many people as part of the process of policy development and analysis. All such contacts are conducted in accordance with the Ministerial Code, the Civil Service Code and Guidance for Civil Servants: Contact with Lobbyists. Some of these discussions take place on a confidential basis, and in order to preserve confidentiality, it is not the normal practice of Governments to release details of specific meetings with private individuals or companies.

Theft and Fraud

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, pursuant to her answer of 28 January 2002, Official Report, column 102W, on theft and fraud, if she will make a statement on the circumstances of the incident of direct contractor fraud; and what assessment she has made of reasons for the increasing trend of theft and fraud in her Department between 1997-98 and 2000-01.

Estelle Morris: I reported in my answer of 28 January 2002, Official Report, column 101W, that there had been 44 instances of direct contractor fraud since 1997–98.
	They relate to instances of suspected fraud/irregularity referred to the Department's Special Investigations Unit (SIU) for investigation and cover the European Social Fund, Schools, Training and Enterprise Councils, Teacher Pensions and miscellaneous Programme Budgets.
	The nature of the problems identified relate primarily to claims for services not properly provided or for inflated costs.
	Within my Department we have, over the last few years, run a Fraud and Control Awareness campaign to raise staff awareness as to their responsibilities for reporting and handling suspicions/allegations etc. We are satisfied that those reporting systems now work well, and that, as a result, all concerns are properly reported and investigated.
	My Department recognises the importance of having sound control systems in place to combat the threat of fraud. In fact 30 per cent. of the cases investigated were identified as a result of the operation of normal control procedures.
	We regularly review the contract management arrangements in place to ensure effective control over public funds and take steps, where necessary, to enhance procedures. For example, since April 2000, in agreement with the European Commission, the Department, through its Government Offices, has introduced new financial monitoring and inspection arrangements with regard to ESF, some of which has resulted in cases being referred to SIU.
	In my earlier response, the estimated cost to the Department for 2000–01 is shown as £17.3 metre, which, when shown against the earlier years' figures, suggests a substantial increase. However this figure includes some exceptional items to the value of £14.9 metre.

Education (Stoke)

George Stevenson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what percentage of the local education authority budget in Stoke-on-Trent has been accounted for by the Standards Fund in each year since 1999-2000.

Stephen Timms: The information requested for Stoke-on-Trent Local Education Authority is as follows:
	1999–2000 4.4 per cent.
	1999–2001 6.3 per cent.
	1999–2002 8.7 per cent.

Empty Properties

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, pursuant to her answer of 29 January 2002, Official Report, column 231W, what the total area in square feet of all empty properties owned by (a) her Department, (b) her agencies and (c) other public bodies for which she has had responsibility was in each year since May 1997.

Ivan Lewis: The total area in square feet of all empty properties owned by my Department, in each of the last four years since May 1997 is as follows:
	1997–1998: 20,913 sq feet
	1998–1999: 20,913 sq feet
	1999–2000: 29,063 sq feet
	2000–2001: 35,363 sq feet
	The Department's agencies and other public bodies do not own any empty properties.

Special Educational Needs

Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans she has to recall the SEN Toolkit issued earlier this year; and if she will revise its guidance on the quantification in SEN statements of (a) support and (b) equipment in accordance with the Code of Practice for the Identification and Assessment of Special Educational Needs.

Ivan Lewis: There are no plans to recall the SEN Toolkit or to revise the information in it on specifying provision in statements of SEN. This information is in accordance with the guidance given on these matters in the SEN Code of Practice and with the law on specifying provision in statements.
	The Independent Panel for Special Educational Advice recently made an application to the High Court for a judicial review of the section of the SEN Toolkit on writing statements of SEN on the grounds that it was unlawful. The High Court has refused permission to bring a judicial review on consideration of the papers.

Special Advisers

Tim Collins: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills on how many occasions since 1 May 1997 (a) departmental and (b) non-departmental special advisers have travelled abroad in an official capacity; and if she will list the total cost, including (i) travel, (ii) accommodation and (iii) subsistence allowance, for each occasion.

Estelle Morris: holding answer 27 February
	Between 1 April 2000 and 31 March 2001, a Special Adviser in my Department travelled abroad on one occasion at a cost of £4,479. Information for the period 2 May 1997 to 31 March 2000 is already in the public domain. All travel by Special Advisers is undertaken in accordance with rules set out in the Ministerial Code, and the Civil Service Management Code.

Pupil Attainment

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many and what percentage of those aged 16 years achieved one or more GCSEs at grade G or above, or the equivalent, in each year since 1997.

Ivan Lewis: The number and percentage of 16-year-old pupils achieving one or more GCSEs at grade G or above, or the equivalent, in each year since 1997 are as follows.
	
		
			 Academic Year Number of 16-year-olds achieving one or more GCSE/GNVQ at grade G or above Percentage of 16-year-olds achieving one or more GCSE/GNVQ at grade G or above 
		
		
			 1996–97 541,812 92.3 
			 1997–98 537,341 93.4 
			 1998–99 545,947 94.0 
			 1999–2000 548,054 94.4 
			 2000–01 570,379 94.5

Pupil Attainment

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many and what percentage of 16-year-olds have obtained five or more GCSEs at grades A* to G or equivalent, including English and maths in each year since 1997.

Ivan Lewis: The number and percentage of 16-year-olds obtaining five or more GCSEs at grades A* to G or equivalent, including English and maths in each year since 1997 are as follows.
	
		
			 Academic Year Number of 16-year-olds obtaining 5 or more grades A*–G or equivalent, including English and maths Percentage of 16-year-olds obtaining 5 or more grades A*–G or equivalent, including English and maths 
		
		
			 1996–97 492,226 83.9 
			 1997–98 482,198 83.8 
			 1998–99 498,587 85.8 
			 1999–2000 503,765 86.8 
			 2000–01 524,058 86.9

Teachers

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many qualified teachers are employed by the Department and its associated agencies.

Ivan Lewis: The Department does not keep records of the number of qualified teachers it employs. The DfES does not have any associated agencies.

Teachers

Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many teachers have left posts in schools in each of the past five years to take positions with the Department and its associated agencies.

Ivan Lewis: The Department does not keep records of the number of teachers that have left posts in schools in each of the past five years to take positions with the Department, DfES does not have any associated agencies.

Teachers

Colin Breed: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the teacher vacancy rate was in (a) nursery/primary schools and (b) secondary schools in each constituency in England (i) in 1992, (ii) in 1997, (iii) in 2001 and (iv) at the most recent available date.

Stephen Timms: Data on teacher vacancies by constituency are not collected centrally. The teacher vacancies as a percentage of teachers in post in maintained nursery/primary and secondary schools by local education authority1 in January 1992, 1997 and 2001 were as follows (2001 is the most recent available year):
	
		
			  Nursery and primary 199219972001 Secondary 199219972001 
		
		
			 City of London 0.0 7.7 0.0 — — — 
			 Camden 1.3 1.3 6.8 1.1 1.3 4.1 
			 Greenwich 0.1 0.6 2.5 0.4 1.8 4.9 
			 Hackney 0.6 3.0 6.6 0.2 0.2 10.0 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 0.9 3.6 3.8 1.7 2.4 7.1 
			 Islington 0.3 0.4 6.1 2.0 3.0 2.8 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 0.0 0.0 6.3 0.0 0.0 6.8 
			 Lambeth 1.3 2.2 4.1 0.2 0.9 2.2 
			 Lewisham 0.0 1.8 3.7 0.6 1.1 4.9 
			 Southwark 0.3 1.9 6.1 2.8 1.1 5.7 
			 Tower Hamlets 3.4 4.2 10.4 1.6 1.4 6.7 
			 Wandsworth 0.1 2.1 2.9 0.9 2.2 4.3 
			 City of Westminster 0.0 3.2 7.4 2.2 0.4 2.2 
			 Barking and Dagenham 1.1 3.8 1.8 0.0 2.2 1.6 
			 Barnet 2.7 0.8 5.6 0.5 0.5 3.3 
			 Bexley 1.2 0.1 4.2 0.1 0.5 5.3 
			 Brent 0.4 1.5 0.9 0.6 1.1 1.7 
			 Bromley 0.3 0.7 2.7 0.4 0.5 3.0 
			 Croydon 0.0 1.7 2.2 0.3 0.2 4.6 
			 Ealing 1.5 1.4 1.3 0.7 0.9 6.3 
			 Enfield 1.0 0.5 2.7 0.4 0.3 2.7 
			 Haringey 4.3 2.4 2.4 1.6 2.9 2.6 
			 Harrow 0.0 0.5 4.2 0.0 0.2 4.9 
			 Havering 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.1 4.3 
			 Hillingdon 3.4 1.2 1.8 1.3 1.0 3.1 
			 Hounslow 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.3 0.8 1.5 
			 Kingston upon Thames 1.0 0.0 2.1 0.2 0.6 2.6 
			 Merton 0.0 0.8 0.3 0.0 0.7 2.8 
			 Newham 4.6 6.5 4.5 2.3 3.0 4.8 
			 Redbridge 1.4 0.2 1.0 0.6 0.2 2.9 
			 Richmond upon Thames 0.6 0.7 2.0 0.9 0.0 4.8 
			 Sutton 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.3 0.3 1.3 
			 Waltham Forest 1.9 3.8 0.0 1.8 0.8 0.9 
			 Birmingham 1.7 0.2 0.8 0.5 0.6 1.0 
			 Coventry 0.8 0.3 0.7 1.0 0.7 1.3 
			 Dudley 2.5 0.5 0.9 0.8 0.1 1.2 
			 Sandwell 0.7 0.6 1.2 1.1 1.0 2.5 
			 Solihull 0.9 0.1 1.0 1.1 0.2 2.3 
			 Walsall 0.7 0.4 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.8 
			 Wolverhampton 0.3 0.5 1.8 0.8 0.4 1.1 
			 Knowsley 0.8 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.5 1.1 
			 Liverpool 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 
			 St. Helens 0.3 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.5 1.0 
			 Sefton 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.5 
			 Wirrall 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.6 
			 Bolton 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.6 
			 Bury 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.6 
			 Manchester 0.6 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 
			 Oldham 0.1 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.8 0.7 
			 Rochdale 1.1 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.1 
			 Salford 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.5 
			 Stockport 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.1 1.8 
			 Tameside 0.7 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.5 2.6 
			 Trafford 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 
			 Wigan 0.0 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.6 
			 Barnsley 0.2 0.1 0.7 0.1 0.0 2.0 
			 Doncaster 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.4 
			 Rotherham 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 
			 Sheffield 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.4 
			 Bradford 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 
			 Calderdale 0.7 1.5 0.5 0.4 1.0 0.4 
			 Kirklees 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.3 
			 Leeds 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.3 1.1 
			 Wakefield 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.7 
			 Gateshead 0.5 0.8 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.4 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 1.5 0.4 1.0 0.4 0.1 0.9 
			 North Tyneside 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 
			 South Tyneside 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 
			 Sunderland 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.5 0.4 0.8 
			 Isles of Scilly 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 
			 Former Avon 1.0 — — 0.5 — — 
			 Bath and North East Somerset — 0.5 0.9 — 0.0 0.5 
			 City of Bristol — 0.6 1.0 — 0.6 1.0 
			 North Somerset — 1.2 0.5 — 0.3 0.6 
			 South Gloucestershire — 0.9 0.3 — 0.2 0.4 
			 Total former Avon area 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.7 
			 Former Cleveland 0.3 — — 0.4 — — 
			 Hartlepool — 1.0 0.3 — 0.8 1.1 
			 Middlesbrough — 0.1 0.7 — 0.6 3.1 
			 Redcar and Cleveland — 0.8 0.5 — 0.4 2.5 
			 Stockton on Tees — 0.4 0.9 — 1.3 1.1 
			 Total former Cleveland area 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.8 1.9 
			 Former Humberside 0.6 — — 0.6 — — 
			 City of Kingston Upon Hull — 0.0 0.0 — 0.2 0.9 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire — 0.0 0.0 — 0.0 0.5 
			 North East Lincolnshire — 0.0 1.5 — 0.0 1.8 
			 North Lincolnshire — 0.5 1.2 — 0.5 0.5 
			 Total former Humberside area 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.2 0.9 
			 Former North Yorkshire 0.1 — — 0.3 — — 
			 North Yorkshire  0.0 0.1 — 0.0 0.4 
			 York — 0.0 0.4 — 0.0 0.5 
			 Total former North Yorkshire area 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.4 
			 Former Bedfordshire 1.6 1.4 — 0.8 0.3 — 
			 Bedfordshire — — 2.3 — — 2.7 
			 Luton — — 4.8 — — 3.8 
			 Total former Bedfordshire area 1.6 1.4 3.4 0.8 0.3 3.0 
			 Former Berkshire 1.8 0.1 — 0.7 0.1 — 
			 Bracknell Forest — — 1.2 — — 3.6 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead — — 2.8 — — 4.0 
			 West Berkshire — — 1.7 — — 0.2 
			 Reading — — 3.7 — — 4.6 
			 Slough — — 7.0 — — 6.2 
			 Wokingham — — 1.2 — — 1.5 
			 Total former Berkshire area 1.8 0.1 3.0 0.7 0.1 3.0 
			 Former Buckinghamshire 0.5 0.6 — 0.7 0.9 — 
			 Buckinghamshire — — 1.4 — — 2.0 
			 Milton Keynes — — 1.3 — — 1.2 
			 Total former Buckinghamshire area 0.5 0.6 1.3 0.7 0.9 1.8 
			 Former Cambridgshire 0.3 0.1 — 0.1 0.2 — 
			 Cambridgeshire — — 0.1 — — 0.1 
			 Peterborough — — 0.5 — — 0.6 
			 Total former Cambridgeshire area 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 
			 Former Cheshire 0.6 0.4 — 0.5 0.2 — 
			 Cheshire — — 0.5 — — 0.4 
			 Halton — — 0.0 — — 1.1 
			 Warrington — — 0.8 — — 0.5 
			 Total former Cheshire area 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.5 
			 Cornwall 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 
			 Cumbria 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.1 
			 Former Derbyshire 0.8 0.7 — 0.5 0.3 — 
			 Derbyshire — — 1.0 — — 0.8 
			 Derby — — 0.6 — — 1.3 
			 Total former Derbyshire area 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.9 
			 Former Devon 0.9 0.4 — 0.5 0.3 — 
			 Devon — — 0.6 — — 1.5 
			 Plymouth — — 0.1 — — 0.0 
			 Torbay — — 0.3 — — 1.5 
			 Total former Devon area 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.3 1.0 
			 Former Dorset 0.0 0.2 — 0.0 0.3 — 
			 Dorset — — 0.8 — — 0.5 
			 Poole — — 2.9 — — 0.9 
			 Bournemouth — — 0.5 — — 1.0 
			 Total former Dorset area 0.0 0.2 1.2 0.0 0.3 0.7 
			 Former Durham 0.3 0.2 — 0.4 0.1 — 
			 Durham — — 0.6 — — 1.3 
			 Darlington — — 0.3 — — 2.1 
			 Total former Durham area 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.1 1.4 
			 Former East Sussex 0.2 0.8 — 0.7 0.4 — 
			 East Sussex — — 0.8 — — 1.9 
			 Brighton and Hove — — 1.0 — — 1.1 
			 Total former East Sussex area 0.2 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.4 1.7 
			 Former Essex 0.2 0.8 — 0.4 0.6 — 
			 Essex — — 2.3 — — 2.4 
			 Southend on Sea — — 1.4 — — 2.8 
			 Thurrock — — 7.0 — — 6.9 
			 Total former Essex area 0.2 0.8 2.7 0.4 0.6 2.7 
			 Gloucestershire 0.5 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.5 
			 Former Hampshire 0.6 0.8 — 0.4 0.7 — 
			 Hampshire — — 2.0 — — 2.3 
			 Portsmouth — — 3.0 — — 6.0 
			 Southampton — — 3.1 — — 3.8 
			 Total former Hampshire area 0.6 0.8 2.3 0.4 0.7 3.0 
			 Former Hereford and Worcester 0.1 0.0 — 0.0 0.1 — 
			 Herefordshire — — 1.2 — — 2.0 
			 Worcestershire — — 0.0 — — 0.3 
			 Total former Hereford and Worcester area 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.6 
			 Hertfordshire 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.6 
			 Isle of Wight 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.1 
			 Former Kent 0.4 1.2 — 0.7 0.4 — 
			 Kent — — 1.7 — — 1.9 
			 Medway — — 2.5 — — 2.4 
			 Total former Kent area 0.4 1.2 1.8 0.7 0.4 2.0 
			 Former Lancashire 0.8 0.2 — 0.4 0.4 — 
			 Lancashire — — 1.0 — — 0.4 
			 Blackburn with Darwen — — 1.4 — — 2.1 
			 Blackpool — — 0.4 — — 0.7 
			 Total former Lancashire 0.8 0.2 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.6 
			 Former Leicestershire 0.5 0.7 — 0.3 0.3 — 
			 Leicestershire — — 0.9 — — 0.5 
			 Leicester — — 2.3 — — 1.0 
			 Rutland — — 0.0 — — 0.0 
			 Total former Leicestershire area 0.5 0.7 1.4 0.3 0.3 0.6 
			 Lincolnshire 0.0 0.9 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.5 
			 Norfolk 1.2 0.7 1.3 0.6 0.5 1.3 
			 Northamptonshire 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.6 
			 Northumberland 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 
			 Former Nottinghamshire 0.2 0.0 — 0.1 0.0 — 
			 Nottinghamshire — — 0.0 — — 0.0 
			 Nottingham — — 1.4 — — 2.7 
			 Total former Nottinghamshire area 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.6 
			 Oxfordshire 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.3 
			 Former Shropshire 0.0 0.1 — 0.0 0.1 — 
			 Shropshire — — 0.1 — — 0.3 
			 Telford and Wrekin — — 0.0 — — 0.8 
			 Total former Shropshire area 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.5 
			 Somerset 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.2 
			 Former Staffordshire 0.0 0.0 — 0.7 0.6 — 
			 Staffordshire — — 0.6 — — 0.6 
			 Stoke on Trent — — 0.4 — — 1.7 
			 Total former Staffordshire area 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.8 
			 Suffolk 1.3 0.8 2.2 1.4 0.5 1.6 
			 Surrey 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.7 2.1 
			 Warwickshire 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.4 1.8 
			 West Sussex 0.7 1.2 1.4 0.3 0.4 1.7 
			 Former Wiltshire 1.1 0.5 — 0.6 0.4 — 
			 Wiltshire — — 0.8 — — 0.6 
			 Swindon — — 0.8 — — 2.1 
			 Total former Wiltshire area 1.1 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.4 1.0 
			 England 0.6 0.6 1.2 0.5 0.4 1.4 
		
	
	1 Local education authorities created by local government re-organisation in 1996, 1997 and 1998 are shown under their parent authority. To allow comparisons between years, the vacancy data for new authorities have been aggregated to give rates for the former authority areas.

Teachers

Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many teachers there were in the different age bands in each local education authority in January 2001.

Stephen Timms: The ages of qualified full time teachers in regular service in the maintained schools sector in each LEA in England at 31 March 2000 are as follows. These are the most recent data available, and are provisional.
	
		
			  Under 25 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 and over Total 
		
		
			 City of London — — — — — — — — — 10 
			 Camden 40 230 220 170 120 150 140 60 30 1,150 
			 Greenwich 80 250 30 180 210 350 250 90 20 1,670 
			 Hackney — 30 60 70 140 190 160 70 20 720 
			 Hammersmith 40 180 130 100 90 120 100 40 10 800 
			 Islington 30 190 210 190 140 160 120 60 10 1,120 
			 Kensington and Chelsea — 40 70 50 50 50 70 30 10 360 
			 Lambeth 40 180 220 200 180 230 180 50 20 1,290 
			 Lewisham 50 210 240 210 220 300 240 90 10 1,570 
			 Southwark 50 210 200 180 180 230 180 60 20 1,300 
			 Tower Hamlets 60 230 270 280 270 290 240 80 20 1,740 
			 Wandsworth 60 290 240 160 160 230 180 70 20 1,400 
			 Westminster 40 220 180 120 110 110 120 60 20 980 
			 Barking 110 270 200 150 180 210 190 50 10 1,360 
			 Barnet 120 440 360 280 260 340 320 130 40 2,280 
			 Bexley 100 280 210 170 250 310 290 110 20 1,740 
			 Brent 80 250 220 190 240 290 260 120 40 1,680 
			 Bromley 100 350 280 210 260 360 380 120 20 2,100 
			 Croydon 110 360 270 210 270 390 340 150 30 2,120 
			 Ealing 130 400 330 200 230 270 280 110 20 1,960 
			 Enfield 120 450 310 270 330 380 310 110 20 2,310 
			 Haringey 50 240 270 270 240 240 210 100 20 1,640 
			 Harrow 70 220 190 130 170 230 200 90 20 1,320 
			 Havering 100 230 200 180 240 320 240 110 20 1,640 
			 Hillingdon 140 430 270 180 240 290 250 90 10 1,900 
			 Hounslow 100 340 300 190 190 250 230 110 20 1,720 
			 Kingston upon Thames 50 200 110 90 90 160 130 40 10 900 
			 Merton 50 190 140 110 130 170 140 70 10 980 
			 Newham 150 470 350 240 250 290 230 70 10 2,070 
			 Redbridge 140 410 260 200 280 290 270 100 20 1,960 
			 Richmond upon Thames 40 170 130 80 100 170 100 50 10 840 
			 Sutton 60 280 170 110 140 260 220 80 20 1,340 
			 Waltham Forest 50 240 240 230 250 340 240 100 30 1,710 
			 Birmingham 390 1,400 1,160 850 1,190 1,870 1,500 540 70 8,960 
			 Coventry 100 330 250 230 340 610 450 180 30 2,510 
			 Dudley 120 390 280 260 390 550 410 160 20 2,560 
			 Sandwell 120 420 250 240 430 580 380 100 20 2,550 
			 Solihull 110 280 200 160 220 360 290 80 10 1,720 
			 Walsall 80 300 230 230 380 560 420 120 20 2,340 
			 Wolverhampton 80 250 230 190 380 510 340 120 20 2,120 
			 Knowsley 80 230 170 170 180 320 240 70 10 1,470 
			 Liverpool 90 480 420 380 540 1,030 780 240 40 4,000 
			 St. Helens 50 190 180 170 170 360 250 80 10 1,440 
			 Sefton 90 340 280 250 310 520 400 190 20 2,400 
			 Wirral 90 300 290 310 390 650 510 180 20 2,730 
			 Bolton 130 320 330 240 320 470 430 130 20 2,390 
			 Bury 60 190 160 150 190 310 270 70 10 1,400 
			 Manchester 130 460 460 380 380 660 600 200 40 3,300 
			 Oldham 90 310 270 250 290 460 340 110 20 2,120 
			 Rochdale 90 280 190 160 270 410 290 90 10 1,770 
			 Salford 80 270 200 150 210 370 250 80 10 1,620 
			 Stockport 80 300 280 210 280 420 400 150 10 2,140 
			 Tameside 70 280 180 180 210 420 340 120 10 1,810 
			 Trafford 70 250 230 160 200 370 300 120 10 1,720 
			 Wigan 100 310 240 230 450 610 510 160 20 2,620 
			 Barnsley 60 210 140 160 260 370 270 80 10 1,550 
			 Doncaster 110 340 260 200 340 600 530 140 10 2,530 
			 Rotherham 80 270 220 220 330 540 420 140 30 2,230 
			 Sheffield 80 360 330 300 440 840 690 220 20 3,260 
			 Bradford 110 430 450 480 700 1,000 800 190 40 4,190 
			 Calderdale 60 240 200 170 240 350 310 90 10 1,670 
			 Kirklees 110 360 310 330 470 730 570 150 20 3,050 
			 Leeds 230 750 590 590 690 1,190 1,090 320 50 5,490 
			 Wakefield 100 370 270 220 380 550 450 140 10 2,490 
			 Gateshead 80 230 180 150 180 370 260 80 10 1,530 
			 Newcastle upon Tyne 90 250 180 210 290 510 370 100 10 2,010 
			 North Tyneside 60 220 140 160 230 370 280 100 10 1,560 
			 South Tyneside 40 150 120 120 200 300 240 120 20 1,290 
			 Sunderland 90 300 250 230 380 560 480 170 20 2,470 
			 Isles of Scilly — — — — — 10 — — — 20 
			 Bath and North East Somerset 40 220 150 120 160 240 210 70 10 1,210 
			 City of Bristol 130 400 350 280 310 510 440 120 20 2,560 
			 North Somerset 50 180 150 130 180 250 240 80 10 1,270 
			 South Gloucestershire 90 300 230 200 250 350 320 110 20 1,850 
			 Hartlepool 40 100 80 60 120 180 150 30 — 780 
			 Middlesbrough 40 160 120 100 190 280 270 70 20 1,240 
			 Redcar and Cleveland 60 180 120 80 170 300 240 80 10 1,230 
			 Stockton on Tees 70 210 150 140 230 330 350 110 10 1,590 
			 City of Kingston Upon Hull 100 220 150 130 300 500 370 110 10 1,900 
			 East Riding of Yorkshire 100 270 210 190 320 540 450 120 10 2,200 
			 North East Lincolnshire 60 150 100 110 180 350 240 70 — 1,260 
			 North Lincolnshire 50 150 100 80 180 330 220 60 10 1,180 
			 North Yorkshire 130 520 410 390 540 780 760 270 30 3,830 
			 York 50 150 160 110 150 230 250 70 10 1,180 
			 Bedfordshire 100 360 280 280 430 660 590 240 30 2,960 
			 Luton 60 200 150 150 200 300 280 100 20 1,470 
			 Buckinghamshire 190 600 350 280 410 720 620 210 30 3,400 
			 Milton Keynes 80 240 190 190 240 340 220 70 10 1,580 
			 Derbyshire 220 590 420 480 740 1,120 1,040 310 30 4,930 
			 City of Derby 80 230 180 200 290 390 330 80 20 1,790 
			 Dorset 110 390 280 250 380 530 460 140 20 2,570 
			 Poole 40 130 100 80 140 200 180 60 — 930 
			 Bournemouth 30 140 90 90 120 230 180 60 10 960 
			 Durham 190 460 370 360 570 950 760 250 40 3,950 
			 Darlington 30 100 80 70 100 200 150 40 10 770 
			 East Sussex 140 430 400 340 470 640 520 150 30 3,120 
			 Brighton and Hove 40 210 230 180 200 290 230 70 10 1,440 
			 Hampshire 460 1,350 910 710 1,000 1,650 1,380 510 60 8,020 
			 Portsmouth 50 200 150 130 170 270 210 90 10 1,270 
			 Southampton 90 250 180 140 180 280 240 80 20 1,460 
			 Leicestershire 160 610 450 390 620 980 820 310 30 4,360 
			 Leicester City 100 330 270 250 350 460 440 130 10 2,340 
			 Rutland — 30 20 20 30 60 50 20 — 230 
			 Staffordshire 270 870 590 540 950 1,430 1,170 410 30 6,250 
			 Stoke-on-Trent 90 240 170 170 250 450 320 110 10 1,800 
			 Wiltshire 120 470 320 310 370 610 480 160 10 2,840 
			 Swindon 90 220 160 120 160 260 210 100 10 1,340 
			 Bracknell Forest 40 120 70 50 90 130 130 40 10 680 
			 Windsor and Maidenhead 50 140 100 90 110 180 160 80 10 920 
			 West Berkshire 60 240 160 110 160 240 190 80 10 1,250 
			 Reading 60 140 100 70 100 170 140 60 10 830 
			 Slough 60 160 120 70 120 150 150 60 10 900 
			 Wokingham 40 190 110 90 160 230 220 70 20 1,130 
			 Cambridgeshire 180 560 390 320 470 740 630 190 20 3,500 
			 City of Peterborough 100 240 180 120 170 300 230 80 10 1,420 
			 Cheshire 220 770 590 460 730 1,090 960 310 40 5,190 
			 Halton 50 160 140 130 150 230 180 50 10 1,100 
			 Warrington 70 290 180 160 210 320 260 60 10 1,560 
			 Devon 150 520 500 440 620 1,020 840 290 40 4,400 
			 City of Plymouth 60 270 250 260 300 390 350 130 10 2,020 
			 Torbay 40 120 100 80 110 180 180 60 10 870 
			 Essex 490 1,460 940 880 1,340 1,890 1,550 580 80 9,210 
			 Southend 60 180 110 130 170 250 190 70 20 1,170 
			 Thurrock 80 170 110 90 120 190 180 60 10 1,020 
			 Herefordshire 40 150 100 90 190 230 250 80 20 1,150 
			 Worcestershire 160 520 420 350 550 920 730 220 30 3,890 
			 Kent 500 1,450 980 890 1,470 2,100 1,680 630 100 9,800 
			 Medway 70 320 210 190 270 390 360 140 10 1,950 
			 Lancashire 320 1,140 920 890 1,340 1,970 1,760 500 60 8,910 
			 Blackburn and Darwen 60 140 150 160 220 280 250 80 10 1,330 
			 Blackpool 60 160 110 100 130 230 140 50 — 980 
			 Nottinghamshire 180 600 550 500 690 1,260 990 270 30 5,060 
			 City of Nottingham 60 200 180 170 200 330 280 80 10 1,500 
			 Shropshire 60 250 210 200 280 440 340 100 20 1,890 
			 Telford and Wrekin 50 170 130 130 190 260 240 50 10 1,240 
			 Cornwall 70 360 320 340 500 770 670 220 40 3,300 
			 Cumbria 110 450 410 310 560 860 730 190 20 3,640 
			 Gloucestershire 170 600 470 380 490 830 720 210 20 3,880 
			 Hertfordshire 510 1,480 910 710 1,010 1,460 1,400 520 70 8,080 
			 Isle of Wight 30 110 100 90 140 230 200 60 10 960 
			 Lincolnshire 240 700 460 420 590 980 880 290 40 4,600 
			 Norfolk 190 660 480 500 750 1,290 1,140 430 60 5,490 
			 Northamptonshire 260 770 540 510 690 1,070 860 280 30 5,010 
			 Northumberland 80 270 230 220 360 570 480 110 20 2,350 
			 Oxfordshire 170 610 490 400 470 700 700 240 40 3,820 
			 Somerset 120 390 280 310 500 710 630 180 20 3,140 
			 Suffolk 220 660 440 400 740 1,090 940 340 50 4,860 
			 Surrey 450 1,400 1,020 580 730 1,140 1,020 420 70 6,830 
			 Warwickshire 190 570 350 300 450 810 690 220 30 3,610 
			 West Sussex 180 790 580 520 730 1,020 840 270 40 4,980 
			 England 16,040 53,260 41,160 35,720 50,030 76,460 63,960 21,460 3,050 361,140 
		
	
	Note: — less than five.
	Age details of part-time teachers have not been given because about 10 per cent. to 20 per cent. of part-timers are not recorded on the Teachers' Pension Scheme, from which the data are obtained.

Teachers

Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills when she will publish the volume of statistics on teachers.

Stephen Timms: The 2001 volume of Teachers in England (including teachers pay for England and Wales) was published on Friday, 22 February 2002. A copy has been placed in the library. Further copies can be obtained from The Stationery Office (ISBN 0-11-271127-8) or online at http:/www.dfes.gov.uk/statistics/DB/VOL/v0319/index.html.

Faith Schools

Graham Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will list the expressions of interest in the establishment of new faith schools which have been received by her Department in (a) the last year and (b) the last three months.

Stephen Timms: Expressions of interest in the establishment of new faith schools which have been received by the Department are:
	(a) in the last year—
	10 Church of England, 12 Muslim, 3 Christian, 2 Jewish, 1 Greek Orthodox, 1 Russian Orthodox, 1 Hindu, 1 Sikh, 1 Quaker, 1 Cherubim and Seraphim, 1 New Testament Church
	(b) In the last three months—
	1 Muslim, 1 Christian, 1 Jewish, 1 Russian Orthodox, 1 Hindu, 1 Cherubim and Seraphim, 1 New Testament Church.

Ministerial Visits

Graham Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many visits she and ministers in her Department have made since 7 June 2001 to (a) comprehensive schools without specialist status, (b) comprehensive schools with specialist status, (c) grammar schools, (d) secondary modern or high schools in wholly selective LEA areas and (e) independent schools, broken down by each category and each minister.

Ivan Lewis: The following visits, on departmental businesses, have been made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Skills and Ministers in her Department since 7 June 2001.
	The Secretary of State made two visits to comprehensive schools without specialist status and three visits to comprehensive schools with specialist status.
	The Minister of State for School Standards made 13 visits to comprehensive schools without specialist status, seven visits to schools with specialist status and one visit to an independent school.
	The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Early Years and School Standards made one visit to a comprehensive school without specialist status and one visit to an independent school.
	The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Adult Skills made one visit to a comprehensive school without specialist status.
	I have visited four comprehensive schools without specialist status and five comprehensive schools with specialist status.

LORD CHANCELLOR

Children and Family Services

David Drew: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department when she will publish the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service's Corporate Plan for 2002 to 2006.

Rosie Winterton: The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS) has published its Corporate Plan today. Copies of the Corporate Plan have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. Further copies of the Corporate Plan may be obtained from CAFCASS.

Enforcement Performance

Shona McIsaac: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what steps she is taking to improve enforcement performance and if she will make a statement.

Phil Willis: The Lord Chancellor has today announced challenging targets for Magistrates Courts Committees for 2002–03 for enforcement of financial and non-financial penalties, as follows:
	Enforcement of Financial Penalties
	An increase of five per cent on the 2000–01 national average payment rate, i.e rising from 63 per cent. to 68 per cent.
	Enforcement of community penalty breach warrants 75 per cent. of adult bail and no-bail warrants executed or withdrawn within 28 days of issue, and 75 per cent. of youth bail and no-bail warrants executed or withdrawn within 14 days of issue.
	Magristrates Courts Committees will be given nearly £10 million extra from April 2002, ring-fenced for enforcement, to enable them to improve performance. We will expect the amount of fine money recovered to increase as a result of the extra funding and will monitor the position carefully to ensure that performance improves.
	We are already taking forward a programme of work to improve enforcement arising from the Department's Post Implementation Review of the Transfer of Warrant Execution project. The Post Implementation Review report will be published on the Department's website on 5 March. We shall be holding a series of conferences for enforcement practitioners in April. These will be followed by the establishment of a Criminal Enforcement Policy Advisory Group, which will be tasked with exploring and evaluating good practice initiatives, revising and updating guidance and taking forward other issues arising from the conferences to improve enforcement.
	Copies of the Post Implementation Review report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses on 5 March.

Disease Control

Michael Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  if the proposed National Infection Control and Health Protection Agency will have (a) a role and (b) powers in respect of disease control in Scotland;
	(2)  who will carry out the functions currently carried out in Scotland by the National Radiological Protection Board following the creation of the National Infection Control and Health Protection Agency.

George Foulkes: I have been asked to reply. 
	I refer the hon. Member to my answer of today.

Patients Forum

Oliver Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he will know what change in expenditure the creation of patients' forums will require, after taking account of funding for community health councils and PALs; and if he will make a statement.

Hazel Blears: holding answer 12 February 2002
	We are working to secure funding to maximise the new system of patient and public involvement, including the introduction of patient forums in every trust, as part of the Government spending review. Resourcing the new structures is a matter we are taking seriously and we expect to receive the outcome of this spending review in the summer 2002.

Health Expenditure

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if (a) over-the-counter health remedies bought by private individuals, (b) money spent on health by charities and (c) money spent on non-NHS nursing homes are included in his Department's figures for total UK health expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product in comparison to EU country figures.

Ruth Kelly: I have been asked to reply.
	The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician. I have asked him to reply.
	Letter from John Kidgell to Mr. Tim Loughton, dated 28 February 2002
	The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent parliamentary question asking if (a) over the counter health remedies bought by private individuals, (b) money spent on health by charities and (c) money spent on non-NHS nursing homes are included in figures for total UK health expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product in comparison to EU country figures. I am replying in his absence. (39209).
	Comparative figures for total health expenditure in EU countries are published by the OECD in XOECD Health Data 2001", UK figures for this dataset were provided in February 2001 by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and do not incorporate improvements made in compilation methods since then. Deviations from the international definitions are fully documented within the dataset.
	On 12 February 2002, ONS published estimates of total UK health expenditure for 1997–2000. The methods for estimating some of the components of the total new and relatively untested, so the improved estimates are being released as experimental. ONS has provided the experimental estimates to OECD for inclusion in XOECD Health Data 2002", the release of which is planned for June 2002. These experimental estimates do include expenditure on over-the-counter remedies bought by private individuals, money spent on health by non-profit institutions serving households (mainly charities) and money spent on nursing care in non-NHS nursing homes.
	The improvements in methods used bring the total UK health expenditure estimates more into line with the international definition, promulgated by the OCED and supported by the World Health Organisation, the World Bank and the European Commission. Details of the methods have been published in Economic Trends No 579 (February 2002) and on the National Statistics website.

North Hampshire Hospital

Andrew Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he will deliver to the North Hampshire Hospital the additional funding for cardiac treatment which he pledged when he visited Basingstoke in May.

Hazel Blears: As pledged in the NHS Plan, investment in heart disease services will be increased by an extra £230 million a year by 2003/04. There will also be an additional £101 million in health authority baseline budgets this year plus extra funds allocated throughout the year. In addition, there will be an extra £120 million of capital funding from the HM Treasury Capital Modernisation Fund to expand capacity and modernise services.
	This year additional funding for North Hampshire Hospitals NHS Trust has been allocated as follows:
	£151,000 cardiac care equipment
	£101,000 rehabilitation services
	£101,000 cardiac management.

Emergency Admissions (Lancashire)

Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Health for each NHS trust in Lancashire, what was the (a) number and (b) percentage change in emergency admissions between April and October in (i) 2001 and (ii) 2000.

Hazel Blears: The latest available data for acute trusts are set out in the table:
	
		
			 Finished first episodes April–August 2000 April–August 2001 provisional Per cent. change 
		
		
			 Blackpool Victoria 10,912 11,330 +3.8 
			 Blackburn 10,327 10,519 +1.9 
			 Burnley 7,912 7,995 +1.0 
			 Chorley 4,149 4,036 -2.7 
			 Morecambe Bay 11,056 11,811 +6.8 
			 Preston 8,955 9,235 +3.1 
		
	
	Source: Hospital Episode Statistics.

Labelling

Richard Younger-Ross: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions he has had with his European Union colleagues regarding strengthening restrictions on country of origin labelling.

Yvette Cooper: None.
	The Food Standards Agency, which is responsible for representing the UK at working level on these matters, is pressing for changes to EU labelling rules to require country of origin labelling on a wider range of foods, particularly meat products. It is also pressing for changes that would prevent misleading labelling by restricting the use of terms like Xproduce of . . ." to those foods where the main ingredient come from, and production processes occur in, the named place or country.

Health Authority Debt

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health which health authorities were in debt in (a) 1997 and (b) 2001; and what was the level of debt in each case.

John Hutton: This information has been placed in the Library. Changes in the accounting and financial arrangements for health authorities mean that the figures for 1996–97 and 2000–01 are not directly comparable.

Sussex Ambulance Service

Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the response time is for the Sussex Ambulance Service in the last period for which figures are available; and what (a) the national average and (b) the Government's target response time is.

Hazel Blears: The Government's target response times require that ambulance services prioritise emergency calls. Immediate life threatening calls are classified as Category A, and other emergency calls are classified as Category B/C. Ambulance services are required to respond to 75 per cent of Category A calls within eight minutes and 50 per cent of Category B/C calls within eight minutes. For rural services, which includes Sussex Ambulance NHS Trust, there should be a response to 95 per cent of emergency calls within 19 minutes, and for urban services within 14 minutes. For urgent patient journeys the ambulance should arrive not more than 15 minutes after the agreed time in 95 per cent. of cases.
	Information about the response times to emergency calls and other requests for transport for Sussex Ambulance NHS Trust and all other ambulance trusts are contained in the Department of Health Statistical Bulletin XAmbulance Services, England 2000-01". A copy is in the Library and available on the Department's website at www.doh.gov.uk/public/sb0115.htm.

Acute Beds

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what his most recent assessment is of acute hospital bed availability in (a) Worcestershire, (b) Gloucestershire, (c) Herefordshire, (d) Warwickshire and (e) Birmingham; and if he will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: The number of available acute beds at midnight on 29 November 2001 in National Health Service Trusts in the areas listed is given in the table:
	
		Available acute beds at midnight on 29 November 2001
		
			 NHS Trust Total acute beds 
		
		
			 (a) Worcestershire 
			 Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust 764 
			 Worcestershire Community & Mental Health NHS Trust 101 
			 Gloucestershire 
			 East Gloucestershire NHS Trust 632 
			 Gloucestershire Royal NHS Trust 695 
			 Severn NHS Trust 7 
			 (c) Herefordshire 
			 Hereford Hospitals NHS Trust 303 
			 (d) Warwickshire 
			 George Elliot Hospital NHS Trust 362 
			 North Warwickshire NHS Trust 28 
			 South Warwickshire Combined Healthcare NHS Trust 30 
			 South Warwickshire General Hospitals NHS Trust 391 
			 (e) Birmingham 
			 Birmingham Children's Hospital NHS Trust 194 
			 Birmingham Heartlands & Solihull NHS Trust 1,168 
			 Birmingham Specialist Community Health NHS Trust 6 
			 Birmingham Women's Healthcare NHS Trust 92 
			 City Hospital NHS Trust 653 
			 Good Hope Hospital NHS Trust 471 
			 Royal Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust 38 
			 University Hospital Birmingham NHS Trust 1,042 
		
	
	Source: DoH winter bed census.
	The number of acute beds in the table includes adult and children's acute beds, critical care beds, specialist beds, special care baby cots, beds in assessment and admission units and beds in observation wards (if available to admit patients to). Some categories of acute beds—such as obstetrics and day care beds—are not included in the Department of Health winter bed census figures quoted but have formerly been included in calculations of acute capacity.

Elective Surgery, Buckingham

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to set up a dedicated fast-track elective surgery centre in the constituency of Buckingham.

Hazel Blears: We announced plans for 26 diagnostic and treatment centres (DTCs) in February 2001. Among these was a proposal for a centre in Milton Keynes.
	We are now looking at ways to extend the DTC programme, including in the south-east and, if possible, to bring it forward. We will consider suitable proposals that stand to benefit even more patients.

Public Appointments

George Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidance his Department has issued in respect of non-executive appointments to (a) primary care trusts and (b) other NHS bodies; and what role primary care trust chairmen have in selecting non-executive members of (i) primary care trusts and (ii) other NHS bodies.

Hazel Blears: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State determines the criteria according to which all non-executive appointments to National Health Service boards are made. He also determines equal opportunities goals and objectives to ensure that boards are representative of the communities they serve. These provisions apart, the appointment of chairs and non-executives to the boards of NHS trusts, primary care trusts and health authorities is now the responsibility of the NHS Appointments Commission. Guidance on the appointments process was issued by the Commission in October 2001. A copy is in the Library. The guidance provides that the chair of the NHS body involved should serve on (but not chair) the sift and interview panels for non-executive board members. However, the final decision on all appointments is taken by the Appointments Commission.

Children Act

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health on which date the extension of section 87 of the Children Act 1989 to include all boarding schools came into force.

Jacqui Smith: The extension of section 87 (87A) of the Children Act 1989 was in the Deregulation and Contracting Out Act 1994, section 38 (87B) was substituted for (87A) in the Education Act 1996.
	The Deregulation and Contracting Out Act received Royal Asset on 3 November 1994. Guidance to local authorities on the affect of the amendment in the Deregulation and Contracting Out Act was issued in January 1995 LAC (95)1.

Overseas Trips

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list each of the overseas trips made by himself and other members of his ministerial team in each of the last four years, specifying the purpose and cost of each trip.

Hazel Blears: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister on 4 February 2002, Official Report, at column 707W.

Bed Blocking

John Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether bed blocking at Birmingham Heartlands Hospital by clients of Birmingham City Council's Social Services Department is delaying operations for Solihull patients.

Yvette Cooper: Birmingham Heartlands and Solihull NHS Trust has been affected by the well-publicised problems with delayed discharges across the whole of Birmingham for most of last year. I am advised that following the allocation of additional XCash for Change" funding in November, there has been an improvement. However, there remain approximately 100 patients who are experiencing delayed transfers of care in the trust. Of these, nine are awaiting social services funding compared with 73 in October 2001, while 31 are awaiting completion of assessments by the Social Services Departments. The Director of Social Services is currently pursuing ways to improve this position.
	I am informed that both the Trust and Solihull Health Authority are ahead of their waiting list profiles and have robust plans to ensure that their end of year targets are achieved. In addition, elective and day case admissions have been at a consistent level, and until early in the New Year the number of cancellations of surgery being experienced by the Trust were below their average levels. There was a temporary increase in the number of cancelled operations for two weeks in January due to a viral outbreak affecting both patients and staff, but this has now returned to normal levels.

Bed Blocking

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Health for what reason old age psychiatry beds are not included in the figures on bed blocking collected by the NHS.

Jacqui Smith: Delayed discharges are collected as an indicator of how well the whole system is working. A number of smaller specialities, including old age psychiatry, are not included, because they have a smaller impact on the overall capacity of the NHS, since the beds involved would not be suitable for most emergency admissions or post-operative care. However, patients in old-age psychiatry beds should be able to receive the right care at the right time, like all other patients. That is why standard 7 of the National Service Framework for Older People sets out to achieve integrated mental health services provided by the NHS and councils to ensure effective diagnosis, treatment and support.

Bed Blocking

Anne McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many old age psychiatry beds, and what percentage of the total, were blocked by patients waiting to enter a care home (a) in the UK and (b) in North Yorkshire, in (i) 1997, (ii) 2000 and (iii) 2002.

Jacqui Smith: The information requested is not collected centrally.

Medway Primary Care Trust

Jonathan R Shaw: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether he has drawn up a shortlist of candidates to fill the post of Chair of Medway Primary Care Trust; when he expects to conduct interviews; and what the expected date of appointment is.

Hazel Blears: The closing date for applications for the post of chair of Medway Primary Care Trust is 15 March. No interview dates have yet been set. However, the National Health Service Appointments Commission anticipate that a decision on the appointment will be made before the end of March.

Private Hospitals

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what training of (a) doctors and (b) nurses for emergency procedures the private sector undertakes; and what help the NHS is able to provide in this regard.

John Hutton: holding answer 28 January 2002
	Information on private sector training of doctors and nurses for emergency procedures is not collected by the National Health Service or the Department of Health. However, the vast majority of doctors and nurses working in the private sector will have been trained in the NHS, where, if the training was undertaken in England, it would include emergency procedures.
	Although the independent sector make no direct financial contribution to nurse training, they do provide clinical placements. The availability of quality clinical placements generally is a significant factor in the NHS's capacity to train newly qualified staff. NHS employer-led work force planning takes account of the needs of the independent sector as well as the NHS so that training output is, resources and capacity permitting, aligned to the overall demands of the pool.
	When the National Standards Commission takes over the regulation of the private health care sector on 1 April, all providers will have to meet core national minimum standards. This will include a requirement to have on duty at all times a member of staff trained in resuscitation, who has updated training annually. In addition, providers have to meet standards specific to the services they provide. For private hospitals, this includes more detailed and stringent standards covering Advanced Life Support and resuscitation equipment, and the requirement that if the hospital does not have intensive care facilities, it must have an arrangement with another hospital in the vicinity. Whether it is NHS or private, it should have such facilities, for patients to be transferred there in an emergency.

Shropshire Health Authority

David Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people, expressed as equivalent full-time posts, are employed by Shropshire Health Authority.

Yvette Cooper: Shropshire Health Authority currently employs 167 staff. This includes those staff contracted to the Health Authority who are currently working within Primary Care Groups.

Primary Care Trusts (Chairmen)

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  who draws up the criteria used by the Independent Appointments Commission to appoint the chairmen of primary care trusts;
	(2)  what independent references are sought before appointing the chairmen of primary care trusts;
	(3)  what independent assessment is made of the accuracy of biographical details supplied by candidates for the chairmanship of primary care trusts.

Hazel Blears: The criteria for all appointments to National Health Service Boards are determined by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. Two references are sought from all new candidates for appointment and are taken up before an appointment is made. Where candidates are serving NHS board members new references are not sought, but interview panels take into account an appraisal of each candidate's performance in post. No independent assessment is made of the accuracy of curricula vitae provided by candidates. However, all candidates are required to sign a declaration acknowledging the fact that if they are appointed and the information they have provided is subsequently found to be untrue, then their tenure of office may be terminated.

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Bob Blizzard: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will draw up a timetable for implementation of the recommendation of the CFS/ME Working Group regarding training.

Yvette Cooper: Responsibility for the content, standards, management and delivery of medical education is shared between regulatory bodies, for example the General Medical Council and the Specialist Training Authority, professional bodies, notably the medical Royal Colleges, universities, the Department of Health and the National Health Service. We expect that these bodies will take account of the latest developments in medicine when developing their syllabuses.
	General practitioners are expected to keep their professional skills up-to-date, and learning will always continue even if formal training has ceased.

Working Conditions and Practice

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment has been made of the effect of the Working Time Directive on his Department's employees; how many employees are working in excess of 48 hours per week; what steps he is taking to reduce this number; and if he will make a statement.

Hazel Blears: The Department carried out an assessment of the implications of the Working Time Regulations in 1998 and issued advice and guidance to both individual members of staff and line managers. This guidance is regularly reviewed and is readily available to all staff.
	Under the Regulations only staff who have voluntarily signed a waiver to the limit on the maximum average length of the working week may work more than an average of 48 hours per week.
	There are currently 39 such waivers signed by staff in the Department. This represents less than three-quarters of one per cent. of the total number of staff employed by the Department as at 31 December 2001.
	We are determined to improve the work/life balance of staff throughout the Department and measures are in place to address instances of long hours working. We remain committed to reducing the number of employees who are required to work in excess of 48 hours per week to an absolute minimum commensurate with meeting the Department's operational needs, and this is kept under regular review.

Correspondence

Adrian Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects to reply to the letter from the hon. Member for Torbay of 3 July 2001 concerning Mrs. James of Rousden Road, Chelston, Torquay.

Jacqui Smith: A reply was sent on 22 January 2002.

Correspondence

James Cran: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when a substantive reply will be given to Julie Hasting's letter of 26 November 2001, concerning the Royal Commission on Long-term Care.

Jacqui Smith: A reply was sent on 21 February.

EU Health Card

Martyn Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to publicise the introduction of the EU-wide health card; and if he will make a statement.

Yvette Cooper: In the Communication from the Commission of the European Communities to the Council of Ministers, entitled XAction Plan for skills and mobility" (Document COM(2002)72—copy available in the Library), the Commission announced its intention to present a proposal early in 2003 for the introduction of an European Union-wide health card. We will look at this proposal constructively when received.

Form E111

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the eligibility of the self-employed is to use (Form E111) for treatment abroad.

John Hutton: Any European Economic Area national resident in the United Kingdom, whether self-employed or not, is entitled to use form E111 for treatment covered by that form in other EEA member states during temporary visits. The only exceptions are workers posted to this country, and resident here, but who remain insured in another EEA member state.

Ambulance Trusts

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent guidelines have been issued by his Department to ambulance trusts about protecting the confidentiality of patients involved in accidents or emergencies.

Hazel Blears: Guidance on confidentiality, XThe Protection and Use of Patient Information", was issued to the National Health Service in March 1996 under cover of Health Service Guidance 96/18. This guidance is applicable to all NHS organisations and covers a wide range of circumstances, including accidents and emergencies.

Cancelled Operations

Liam Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether figures recording the number of cancelled operations include (a) those operations cancelled before the day of admission and (b) the individual cancellations of patients who have their operation cancelled on multiple occasions.

John Hutton: Figures are collected on a quarterly basis on the number of patients whose operations are cancelled by the hospital for non-clinical reasons on the day patients are due to arrive, or after arrival in hospital, or on the day of their operation. These figures are not broken down to show whether a patient has been cancelled by the hospital more than once.

External Contracts

Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  which non-accounting and non-information technology external organisations have won new contracts with (a) his Department and (b) executive agencies in each of the past five years,
	(2)  which non-accounting and non-information technology external organisations which previously held contracts with his Department (a) won new contracts at the culmination of the existing contracts and (b) won new contracts after a period of inactivity with his Department in each of the past five years

Jacqui Smith: The information requested can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Beef Imports

Tim Yeo: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will provide details of the consignments of beef imported into the UK that have been found to have contravened EU BSE regulations in the last two years. (201)
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Hazel Blears: A European Union Decision on BSE, effective from 1 October 2000, introduced, among other things, a requirement that all Specified Risk Material (SRM) be removed at the slaughterhouse and disposed of in a safe manner. The importation of meat with SRM attached had been illegal under United Kingdom domestic legislation for several years previously.
	Since the EU rules came into effect, there have been 22 instances where consignments of carcase beef imported into the UK from other EU member states have been found with SRM (portions of spinal cord) attached. There has also been one instance where ovine SRM has been found in a half ewe carcase. In each case, the Food Standards Agency has taken up the matter vigorously with the authorities of the member state concerned, and reported the discovery to the European Commission. The 23 instances (22 bovine and 1 ovine) involved 21 different meat plants from seven member states. It is the responsibility of the relevant national authorities to ensure that meat plants in their territory comply with the EU rules. Eight of the plants have had their operating licences suspended as a result.
	Details of the 23 instances are set out in the table:
	
		Finds of Specified Risk Material in Imported Meat
		
			 Date of discovery Place of discovery Finding/action taken by MHS Source 
		
		
			 (1) 17 January 2001 ABP, Newry, County Down Spinal cord in two of a consignment of 221 forequarters. Loblein Teterower Fleisch GmbH Landkreis Gustrow, Germany 
			 (2) 17 January 2001 ABP, Newry, County Down Spinal cord in one of a consignment of 192 forequarters. Westfleisch Lubbeck, Germany 
			 (3) 29 January 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Spinal cord in one of a consignment of 216 hindquarters. Oldenburg, Germany 
			 (4) 1 February 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Spinal cord in one of a consignment of 217 hindquarters. Fleisch-Versand Heinz Gausepohl Bakum, Germany 
			 (5) 2 February 2001 Northern Ireland Remnants of spinal cord in two of a consignment of 230 fore and hindquarters. Operation of plant suspended indefinitely on 8 February. Liffey Meats, Ballyjamesduff, Co. Cavan, Republic of Ireland 
			 (6) 1 March 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Several pieces of spinal cord in five of a consignment of 216 fore and hinquarters. Operation of plant suspended on 8 March. Fleischverkaufsstelk Kalkar, Germany 
			 (7) 1 March 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Several pieces of spinal cord in seven of a consignment of 188 quarters. Operation of plant suspended 6–9 March. Brada's Vleeschbedrijf BV, Leevwarden, Netherlands 
			 (8) 2 March 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Several pieces of spinal cord in four forequarters of a consignment of 222 hind and forequarters. Operation of plant suspended on 8 March. Mueller Fleisch GmbH, Birkenfeld, Germany 
			 (9) 5 March 2001 Blackpool Abattoir, Blackpool, Lancs. 8 cm piece of spinal cord in one forequarter out of a consignment of 53 whole carcases. Operation of plant suspended 6–9 March. Brada's Vleeschbedrijf BV, Leevwarden, Netherlands 
			 (10) 7 March 2001 Matheson Jess Ltd., Dundee, Scotland Spinal cord in two forequarters of a consignment of 158 heifer carcases. Giresa Palencia, Spain 
			 (11) 9 March 2001 Great Harwood Food Products, Blackburn Spinal cord in two of a consignment of 268 forequarters. Fribin S.A.T. Binepar, Spain 
			 (12) 20 March 2001 Great Harwood Food Products, Blackburn Unexposed spinal cord in cervical vertebral canal in 41, out of a consignment of 204 forequarters. Operation of plant suspended 22–29 March. Industria Carni SNC Carema (Torino) Italy 
			 (13) 21 March 2001 Dungannon Meats, Larne, Northern Ireland Spinal cord found in one forequarter in a consignment of 220 quarters. Kildare Chilling, Kildare, Republic of Ireland 
			 (14) 30 March 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Spinal cord found in two forequarters in a consignment of 203. Slaughter of cattle temporarily prohibited at plant on 30 March. Fleischzentrum Wilhelmshaven, Germany 
			 (15) 30 April 2001 St. Merryn Meats (Victoria), Cornwall Spinal cord found in two forequarters in a consignment of 158. Plant orderd to re-inspect all cuts of meat for spinal cord. Plant to introduce own checks and demonstrate their efficiency to Danish Food & Veterinary Adminstration. Danish Crown, The Skive, Brarupsgade 6, 7800 Skive, Denmark 
			 (16) 25 June 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Spinal cord found in two forequarters in a consignment of 230. Operation of plant suspended on 26 June until 2 July when all the conditions laid down by German authorities had been complied with. Gausepohl Fleisch GmbH, Bakum 
			 (17) 2 August 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Spinal cord found in one quarter in a consignment of 240. Fair Oaks Clonmel Limited, Upper Irishtown, Clonmel, Co. Tipperary, Ireland 
			 (18) 7 August 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Spinal cord found in one quarter in a consignment of 200. Domburg Vlees bv OUD, Bodegraafseweg 43, 2411 HT Bodegraven, The Netherlands 
			 (19) 21 August 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Spinal cord found in four quarters in a consignment of 236. Expsl. J. Gosschalk en Zoon BV Oenerweg 2–4 8161 PM Epe, The Netherlands 
			 (20) 24 October 2001 Cumberland Meat Packers Ltd, Coventry Spinal cord found in one quarter in a consignment of 240. Kroot Vlees BV Enschotsestraat 28 5013 BD Tilburg The Netherlands NL 008141885BO1 
			 (21) 9 November 2001 Najib & Sons, Foston, Derbyshire Spinal cord found in one half ewe carcase in a consignment of 127. Awaiting details EEC 522 
			 (22) 15 November 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Spinal cord found in two quarters in a consignment of 44. NV EEG Slacthuis Verbist Gentse Heerweg 78 B-8870 Izegem, Belgium 
			 (23) 29 November 2001 Anglo Dutch Meats, Eastbourne, Sussex Spinal cord found in five quarters in a consignment of 196. Vleesgroothandel NV Dierickx Baaikensstraat 12, 9240 Zele, Belgium